Yeah "Wooo!", but maybe not so much. They finally catch up in gaming, and they raise pricing? Actually every new CPU announcement has them catching intel in gaming, and then the 3rd party reviewers get a hold of the CPU's... Looks good, but those price increases along with relatively expensive B, X mobo's, and 3600+ RAM will end up costing more than current Intels. Hopefully Intel cuts pricing. They've been getting over for a decade basically.
Intel doesn't manufacture NVIDIA products if you hadn't heard. So yes, PCIe 4.0 indeed DOES help AMD CPUs, which is what today's announcement is about. And all benchmarks confirm this. The battle for CPU supremacy is between, believe it or not, the CPU makers - AMD and Intel. And the new king is AMD. Cry elswhere.
Novaswimwear offers great deals on swimsuits to their customers. We are providing you all types of swimsuit regardless of size. You will get every size from small to large. We never compromise over quality. Novaswimwear is the best online swimwear maker in Australia. We have a professional team to take care about design and color each and everything. Where every business and manufacture converting their business not just online but working to make proficient from a warehouse to customer doorstep. We also take bulk orders if there is any sports event or for your school or university competitions. Nobody wants to be left behind to enjoy swimming under the swimming pool. In order to keep clean the pool water of the pool is chlorinated by chemicals. Usually, traditional clothes get damages in Australia. Manufacture and businessman try to upgrade and maintain their reputation to keep by producing a new quality of chlorine resistance swimwear. Chlorine can damage the elastic fabric. It causes a reduction in the life span of fabric shape as well as quality. On the other hand, chlorine resistant swimsuit is made of a proposition of polyester fabric and it helps you to repel the side effects of chlorine exposure. Extra polyester helps your swimwear from damage so it remains in good shape for a long time. They are durable and possess good elasticity features.
Girls swimwear sale are in a string bikini meant for lounging on the beach would basically be like jogging in jeans and a sweater. Technically, you could do it, but you’d be much more comfortable in a swimsuit specifically designed for exercise. For training, the most important factor is fit A properly fitting suit is also important to prevent painful chafing. The full range of Nova swimwear sale that has been standard in the "true to size" summer sales for curvy women and fashion models. We have sizes from 14 to 24. You may estimate that you will need a size small or a normal size. The Novaswimwear brand will look trendy and adorable on your curvy body. Discover the sale of women's swimwear and beachwear at Novaswimwear. Shop the latest collection of women's swimwear and beachwear on sale. Find great deals on swimwear in our exclusive women's sale range. Shop for everything from swimsuits, bikinis, and tankinis to beach cover-ups. Every franchise loves the sports illustrated swimsuit edition. Swimsuit has always been a highly anticipated edition of the Sports Illustrated franchise. Sports girls swimwear sale is trendy nowadays especially in females. We have a large range of sporty swimsuits. Our collection includes One-piece and knee-length. It entirely fits the body with a sporty feel. Make a splash and get moving in our bold range of sports swimwear.
"Amd has PCI-4 and Intel does not" That sure propelled them into the 'gaming greatness' lead with X570, right? 'Wait until some real PCI-e 4.0 GPUs deliver!", they said...! :)
We have designed multi-colored and shoe-making shoes for boys to feel different in variety. These boys swimwear are made of pure chlorine resistant fabric. We set up a variety of beautiful birds and beaches in Australia. Take good care of the feelings and reactions of the boys with the wind. To buy boys swimwear in Australia peruse our large collection of swimwear. These swimsuits are dye sublimated with a groovy purple colored design and are very functional and are purpose made to suit Training and Racing or even relaxing by the pool. Stylish boys swimwear for the holiday look. Swim trunks and beachwear, shop the collection. FREE Shipping for orders over $50.00. The finest quality long-lasting children's swimwear made to the highest standards in Australia. We only use chlorine resistant polyester fabric. Styles include Jammers, Briefs, and Trunks. Made with comfort and durability in mind. They can be bought anywhere online. We also have our own outlet in different Australian areas. We created chlorine resistance swimwear. When looking to purchase a swimsuit, look for our upcoming discounts or coupons. You can buy at cheap rates this way. This swimwear is expensive so students need to be aware of these discounts. They should ask their seniors as well as friends and family members.
Beautiful summer whenever summer hits, there is always wide range of variety of plus size swimwear, swimwear, or bather whatever you name it. It is in market for the Aussie body. In this era, anyone can place an order for different styles they love in bulk from online or physical outlets and right away the order in front of their house doorstep. There are others stingy ways. There are number of markets where huge variety with awesome pieces of plus size swimsuits or bather available. The biggest problem is that how to buy a good plus size swimsuit in a local or online market. I mean to say what are pros or cons while purchasing swimwear. Looking for swimwear to appear fashionable and durable. Then find something that covers up your body part you don’t want to be visible in a public place. Keep trying out different option and look is it look quite right, if there is a body part of your visible then leave it. Try the next one. ● Don’t compromise quality over price - yes quality comes priority and quality comes with the high price. Swim with confidence in this summer in the water pool with striped skirted plus size swimwear. This is unique in design. It looks like a halter neck and frill skirt. It is a congratulatory swimwear. It allows you to sunbath in a fashionable way.
as it stands the flagship 10900k is £549 in the UK but this is beaten in gaming by the £299 ryzen 5600 and well beaten by the £449 Ryzen 5800x and totally destroyed in every way by the £559 ryzen 5900x an extra £10 is not a lot to pay for a CPU that has 2 extra cores and is anything from 20-50% faster than the £549 intel offering intel will have to cut the prices of its chips in half just to compete at the moment and i dont think the next gen intel chips will regain the crown either as its going to be yet another 14nm rehash of a 15 year old core design with possibly Pcie gen4 bolted on via yet another new chipset
You would normally expect new generations of hardware to increase performance at iso-price. Otherwise, we'd be buying billion-dollar computers these days given the performance increases over the decades.
Amd has now Intel between hammer and anwill! New 5000 series is faster and more expensive. Old 3000 remains to be the bargain offering. Intel is in the hard spot in between! If you want to get the best bang for the buck... buy amd 3000, if yoy wan to get the greatest and the best buy amd 5000 series. I think that from marketing and economy point amd made smart move in there! If Intel keep current prising amd does get better margings from 5000 series. If Intel reduce prices amd can do the same and keep the same situation. Intel willl have better option below aka amd 3000 series and superior product above. So Intel needs now new product that is really good and Also cheap... and 14nm does not leave much room in there...
When a company is no longer competing with low pricing, but rather good performance, price goes up. This is basic capitalism. AMD, ATI, intel, nvidia, 3DFX, literally any company ont he planet will do so in the basence of proper competition.
That's now how it works. New is better than old and costs more, but eventually newer comes out, new becomes old, and goes down in price to match the previous old price. Now compared to the original old, you are getting new for the same price. So you eventually get higher performance for the same price. Newer now costs when new used to cost, and new costs what old used to cost.
The end result after many iterations is that all of newer, new, and old are much, much better than their long-time-ago equivalents at the same price point.
That is where we are today.
The AMD Ryzen 5000 Zen 3 series is now in the 'new' category, is it costs more than 'old' but eventually will cost the same as 'old'.
Things work the way bji described for AMD processors. I can't recall cases of Intel lowering the prices of their older processors. A year ago the i9-9980XE was selling for $1,990 even though Intel had announced the 9-10980XE, priced at $979, would be arriving on November 1. (The i9-9980XE and i9-10980XE are essentially the same 18 core processor, but the i9-10980XE has higher turbo frequencies due to tweaks to the 14nm process.)
AMD have been on catch-up for years - and now they caught up. They don't need to buy market share anymore, they can earn it. I doubt they'd be raising prices above this in future, but part of Lisa Su's mission has been to raise profitability and this ought to do it.
All I would say to that is "hopefully". I will never believe a manufacturer's release hype. AMD have a habit of being relatively honest but, I want to see real world reviews before I say anything.
I almost got swept up in the nvidia 20xx hype. Then people calmed down and we are seeing the reality.
"I will never believe a manufacturer's release hype"
There's no good reason to apply that to AMD at the moment, though. Comparing them to Nvidia in that regard simply isn't warranted. I won't *buy* before the reviews, but I'm not expecting any big upset between now and then.
No, there is good reason. AMD is not immune to exaggeration, lies, fraud, or corruption. The same goes for other (consumer-friendly) "good guy companies" like LG and even CD Projekt Red.
Never Pre-order, and Always wait for Reviews.
^That above mantra have saved people so much headache and money in the past, that its not funny. Let the idiots with more money than sense, let them waste their cash, and take the unnecessary risk in the tech products. If you don't get the CPU, GPU, Console, Phone, Game etc etc upon release, you're actually not missing out. You could get it a couple days later, or a couple weeks.... or even if it is a couple months later you still aren't missing out. In fact, some smarter people make money off these dumb/rich snobs by buying their older hardware at low prices, and flip it, or use it themselves (ergo Salty RTX-2080Ti owners recently).
That's not a good reason, it's a truism contradicted by recent evidence. I didn't say we should believe them because they're "good guys", it's because all leaks to this point - and their previous releases - have indicated that these claims are thoroughly plausible.
Not sure why the lecture about pre-orders, I just openly said I don't think buying before release and review makes sense.
That is a good reason. While I don't disagree with your assessment, I'm thoroughly against your premise. Sorry for the lecture, it's just that philehidiot's comment resonanted well with me. And yours was in contrary to it.
My point is, at any time by any company, you can get duped. Wether if that's a paper launch, exaggerated numbers, or just brilliant marketing/hype. Or a combination of the three. You can never know how a product really measures up until it is tested and verified on the basis of merit.
Let's look at an example, AMD's first Bulldozer CPUs, their 4c/8t (dubbed 8-core) seemed like a great product on the announcement and worthy of a pre-order. But they weren't upto snuff against Intel's second-gen Core-i processors of the time. You're point is "now is a different time" and that would be correct. But it is an unnecessary risk. There's no need to take the risk. You don't miss out. FOMO is plain BS. It always pays to be intelligent/skeptical as a consumer.
He specifically said that you shouldn't buy before reviews but that he doesn't expect any big surprises. AMD has been very accurate for several years about performance improvements in their CPUs. They've developed a track record of integrity. So while it's possible they could suddenly throw it all away its just not _very likely_.
2017 - Broadwell-E 8-core was $1099 (HEDT). Ryzen 1800X 8-core was $499.
It wasn't so long ago that Intel was charging a small fortune to get more than 4-cores and only incrementally updating its processors which needed new motherboards each time.
Anyone paying attention can see the "logical" progression: 2016: "Intel processors cost so much because they are have superior overall performance and perf/watt. Perf/$ is mostly static because AMD suck." 2017: "Intel processors still cost more because they retain an overall performance advantage. Perf/$ is only relevant to scrubs who can't afford the best, perf/watt rules." 2018: "Intel processors cost more for similar performance because they perform better in games. Single-core performance is king." 2019: "Intel processors still cost so much because 99% frame times at 1080p maybe? Who cares about perf/watt anyway. It's about reliability / premium products / etc." 2020: "How dare AMD charge more than Intel for processors that provide better perf/watt and superior single-core performance. Clearly per/$ is the most important metric. There is no excuse for taking advantage of consumers. I might buy Intel in protest because I am angry about this."
EXACTLY! even with the 50$ plus the value is really incredible ... 3 years ago, when AMD wasn't that competitive, you had to pay the same amount for 4 cores instead of 16 ...
This after AMD spent the past three years forcing Intel to completely redefine the price, positioning and construction of their entire product range, too.
"Oh noes, now they actually want to make profit, this makes them bad."
From a personal perspective it chafes - I've never been someone who could spend $400+ on a CPU - but I don't have to. If I can't afford the 5600X, I'll get a 3000 series on discount and still get a better combination of performance per dollar and power consumption than Intel can offer. Happy times.
Fair comment, but its not the AMD high-end pricing that bothers me.
It's $300 for a 6-core CPU that I can't stomach. That will drive many people to older AMD CPUs, or perhaps even to Intel 6-core CPUs after they crunch the numbers.
I honestly don't understand how either brand still has so many diehards... My one and only AMD system was a s939 A64 (struggling to remember the model, gasp! a Winchester I think), had 3 Intel desktops since then, but it's looking like my next upgrade (from a 6700K) will inevitably be my 2nd AMD. Why wouldn't you just buy whatevs the best bang for your buck and usage case?
These aren't cameras or phones where there's some degree of ecosystem lock-in, or something like audio where more subjective preferences factor in... CPU/GPU fan debates always seemed like the most inane hobby battle ever. /shrug
I think there's a difference between this time and the other occasions on which AMD has claimed to beat Intel on gaming:
AMD is now providing many more benchmarks, instead of basing its leadership claim on a single title such as CS:GO.
With that being said, AMD's newfound gaming lead is still very small. So the price increase, even though not that bad on the upper end of their lineup (the 5900X is a better deal than the 10900K and the 5950X simply has no competition), really does hurt the value proposition of its lower-end models.
The 4800X is going to be $100 more expensive than the 10700K for the same core count and near identical gaming performance. The 6-core 4600X is going to be $40 more than the equivalent 10600K, and just $50 cheaper than the 8-core 10700K. It's simply nonsensical.
People who game will likely go for the lower-end models, and on the lower-end AMD's products won't make much economical sense. They may be much better than Intel's offerings on productivity, but that is not important on the low-end. The pure gaming lead is just too small to justify the price hike on these models.
5600X vs. 10600K will be an interesting story. It looks like 5600X could be 15% faster than 10600K in gaming, which is bigger than the 3600X to 10600K gap. Meanwhile, the 5600X will use less energy and it's the only one in that list that comes with a bundled cooler, apparently. Also, I'm seeing a $25 price difference, not $40.
Hahaha, thanks for the correction. I still didn't get used to AMD skipping the 4000-series.
Still, I have to disagree with you. There is no way for the 5600X to be 15% faster in gaming than the 10600K. The 5900X has two more cores than the 10900K and its average gaming lead is just 7%. So, when we compare a 6-core AMD part to a 6-core Intel one, I wouldn't expect a two digit leap, if there remains any gaming superiority at all.
According to Tom's Hardware, the 10600KF's MSRP is $237. That's actually $60 less than the 5600X's. The 10700KF is just $50 more than the 5600X, and $100 less than the 5800X.
You're right that the Zen 3 CPUs are more energy efficient and that the 5600X comes with a cooler, but I still fear it won't be enough for AMD to be the best pure gaming deal on that price range.
If you factor productivity, that's another thing, since AMD's last gen was already superior to Intel on this regard, and it's going to expand its lead a lot thanks to the 19% IPC gains. But on the lower end where productivity doesn't matter that much, I guess AMD could do a lot better without a 20% price hike on the 5600X.
I found a benchmark showing 3600X at about 92% of 10600K for some game at 1080p. I multiply 0.92 by 1.26 (which I assume is a combo of IPC, clock gains, and latency improvements), and I get around 1.15. Feel free to use different numbers, or we can just wait for real benchmarks.
I'm seeing 10600K (not KF or non-K) for $275 on Amazon, $270 at Micro Center.
Your calculation really does make sense, but if AMD had such a lead with the 5600X over the 10600K, it would have been a weird decision to showcase the twice smaller 5900X's lead in the presentation instead.
Watching Hardware Unboxed's analysis video, it seems review outlets may have additional AMD slides.
AMD claim 5600X leads the 10600K by 13% in perf/$ in 1080p gaming, 19% in single threaded and 20% in multi-threaded.
Since price quoted for both is the same - MSRP of $299 - performance delta would be the same +13% (for not-even-close-to-GPU-bound high refresh rate gaming).
Most games don't fully utilize more than 6 cores. If there are more available, sure the threads will be spread across all of them, but then the usages for some cores will be in the 25 - 50% range.
This means that the 5900X would get little benefit (depending on game, no benefit at all) from the two extra cores compared to the 10900K.
I think it's certainly possible the 5600X will be well ahead of 10600K, but not a given. Reviews will tell.
Listening to yourself talking about multicores cpu for game. Pure logic isn't it. I bought AMD 8cores labtop $1.6K and going to get 16cores 5950x soon when ever it came out. Why? for the past 10years, i tried to buy Intel CPU system and my pocket is not deep enough to do more than 4 cores, now AMD make and offers like 5950x less than $1k, this I can't refuse.
We provides back style ladies swimwear Australia. We have stock of different back styles. They are beautifully designed. They will secure you in the water. The major benefit of the back styles is that they give you freedom of movement. These back styles are designed to support you in every aspect. These designs are basically for those who swim for fitness. They also cover professional trainers. Especially girls competition swimwear has such back styles. The venue for the competitions are water pools. Back styles are suitable for leisure modes. I will suggest you that you should go for the one that makes you comfortable. These designs are great for those girls competition swimwear who need freedom of movement. It is also the best support for them. These designs have a shelf bra to feel light plus to provide you modesty. They have wider straps to secure fitting. These designs are available in the old classic Cottesloe style and Black / Navy plus with trendy prints such as Oliver Action back, Bolt Speed back. We have made it chlorine-proof with techno fabric Eco last material. Novaswimwear Jammer & brief styles provide great freedom of movement for active swimmers. These comfortable designs are more proficient and reliable for athletic physique.
And of course AM4 socket platform remains. Good luck purchasing Intel's next gen CPUs knowing the die shrinkage issues they've had and openly discuss are ongoing AND will require switching (yet again... sigh) to a new socket. Intel can't get their s*** straight in the CPU market. AMD on the other hand already had the price performance crown with 3000 series in Ryzen 3rd gen (and prior) and now rules the roost w/ Zen 3 5000 series. What's Intel announced? Oh yeah... more fabrication setbacks. The nail is in the coffin. Get over it. The king is dead. Long live the (new) king.
Now I wouldn't say dead, this same thing happened a few short years ago when AMD was king the last time. Not a fanboy but an observer here, the tide has ebbed and flowed between AMD and Intel, this has happened in the past and will happen again eventually Intel will take back the crown and then AMD will try to get it back....... so long as arm doesn't kill them both
JfromImaginstuff is right here. Intel's core designs were clearly stronger than AMD's up until now - they just couldn't manufacture them with decent yields or power characteristics. Once they sort that out (and they seem to be making progress) we'll have actual competition again. But I'm very, very glad to see AMD making hay while the sun shines.
When You will have to spend a considerable amount of money out of your pocket to purchase new swimwear. Hence, you are concerned about the returns that you are getting out of your swimwear. In fact, you expect them to last for a longer period. Therefore, we encourage you to go ahead and purchase Girls Australian Made Chlorine Tough Swimwear. They will be able to help you with saving a considerable amount of money in the long run. If you are still not convinced, go ahead, and look at all the benefits that you can experience. Then you will purchase such swimwear without thinking twice. ● They will not lose their shape Chlorine resistant girls’ bathers you purchase will never lose their shape. That is because they can control the impact created by chlorine and retain their good shape. You can always keep the swimwear in perfect condition. When you are getting such a perfect fit, you will not come across the need to spend more money and purchase new swimwear. This is one of the most prominent examples available to show how chlorine resistant girls racing swimwear can be cheap swimwear. ● Colors will not fade out At the time of purchasing girl’s swimwear, you often tend to go ahead with colorful options available in the market. Like, you do not expect colors offered out of swimwear to fade out along with time. However, chlorine can interact with the colors of your fabric. This will make the colors to fade away. As you can see, chlorine resistant swimwear will be able to deliver many benefits on your way. All these benefits will help you with saving a considerable amount of money. That is why you should not think twice before you purchase Chlorine resistant swimwear. Even if you must spend more money on buying them, you will be able to use them for an extended duration of time, which ensures the delivery of best returns out of your investment.
Pool water is always chlorinated with chemicals. Novaswimwear makes chlorine resistant swimwear for their swimmer customers such as mens swimwear Australia. Our products are totally Australian made swimwear. Rashies are common for sunburn but you also have to sit in the sun. We make womens to spend worry free moments under the sun. Now it is summer season. That means the weather is going to heat up. Finally the days to swim in the pool are imminent. Mens swimwear Australia helps men to protect from sun and UV rays. So they can have a lot of fun with water. Novaswimwear puts all efforts to design this chlorine resistant swimwear for their customers. These designs include jammer, brief and trunk. We have all ranges of sizes for every type of body. In this summer season, people want to take a quick dip in the pool. So the sun is on the top of your head. It can burn your skin. We want craft and design in addition to resistance from sunburn. Fabric- After taking a bath on the beach, if you are going home with wet bathers, it is not good for you or anybody. Search out for comfortable fabric. It has features that it can dry up quickly. It should have chlorine-resistance characteristics. It helps to keep swimsuits in good shape and color for longer periods of time.
"Good luck purchasing Intel's next gen CPUs knowing the die shrinkage issues they've had and openly discuss are ongoing AND will require switching (yet again... sigh) to a new socket"
Good luck thinking that the NEXT AMD CPU will still remain on AM4. DDR5 will require new socket, coming out with the new range of CPUs to be sold in 2021 with DDR still is backwards. Everybody would be better off if AMD had indeed changed the socket for DDR5 compatibility earlier than later.
Don’t feel too bad, you can still get a 4000 series APU, mini PC, I wish I waited and got one of those, less building, postage time, money, frustration. Put in some laptop RAM, PCIe 3 and SATA flash, from the same company, get express postage, to the newsagent. Wish I had, I’ll just have to wait, for the 5000 series APU’s, in the middle of next year.
Your analysis is rather one sided, and maybe more than a little pro-Intel...
You omit that to run the 10700K, you need a new motherboard, and you will need a Z class motherboard, thats $300 on top of the price you pay for your 10700K. For that additional $300, you'll get fewer PCI-e lanes, and they will be slower. So on the few Intel boards that will allow bifurcation of the PCE-e x16 slot, you'll have fewer SATA ports and fewer USB ports, and you won't be able to use PCI-e gen 4 storage...
Also, you'll need a massive and v/ expensive cooler to deal with the 229 watts of heat the 10700K will produce when it turbos, or you can save money on that massive cooler, and the CPU will never boot to anywhere near its top speed, and you'll be playing games on a CPU thats slower than a AMD 3500 and be paying twice the price...
Oh, and 100 watts extra on your electricity bill, always and forever! And if you have air-con, an additional 100 Watts to remove the heat from your room/home!
I have a Ryzen PC, so for me a new morherboard wouldn't be required. But people making a Ryzen build from scratch would need a new motherboard anyway, and they will be getting no upgradeability since it's the last gen on AM4. AMD's new motherboards aren't also what I would call cheap, specially since they got PCI-E 4.0.
The most appealing part of your argument would be about cooling Intel CPUs. But given that only the 5600X comes with a bundled cooler, the 5800X would give you such an expense as well.
As a matter of fact, I think that the 5800X is the most oddly priced of these CPUs. If I ever go Zen 3, I will pay $100 more and get 4 more cores on the 5900X, which has the best price proposition.
"But people making a Ryzen build from scratch would need a new motherboard anyway"
But the millions and millions who already have a AMD X570/B450/A420 platform, won't, so that's a $300 saving for them!
"only the 5600X comes with a bundled cooler, the 5800X would give you such an expense as well"
Err, nope! Point to a single review that shows how a Ryzen CPU draws 229 Watts in normal usage! Unlike an Intel CPU, you can save $100 just on the cooling! Like I said, you can save that amount too on Intel, butthen again you can forget about that Turbo boost speed, and your CPU will run like a $150 AMD one!
Don;t get me wrong, until 5th November, there are reasons to have bought an Intel CPU, and maybe after 5th November there might be reasons to still buy one, but the use case will be so niche after that date, you've got to have reasons you so far haven;t been able to articulate.
Its not good to fan-boy a company, any company. I've owned both Intel and AMD, but really I can't see anyone but Fan boys highlighting Intel from next month, as to so so makes no sense! I'm running a 3950X right now, and this launch gives me no compelling reason to upgrade, but would I buy Intel, nope! Too expensive, to restrictive an eco-system (try getting 3200Mhz memory on a H series motherboard), and too high a TDP, and from whats happened today, at best they now tie with AMD.
Intel were wee-weeing and laughing at AMD three yars ago about their 'glued together CPU', when the market place was crying out for more cores...
Intel is reaping what it sowed, nothing more nothing less and to shill form them appears at best daft to me...,
But if you're already on AM4, it's not like it would make any sense to consider going Intel.
People who will have to choose between those two platforms for a new build are those who don't have an AM4 chipset. That's why I didn't take that as an argument for Zen 3's value proposition.
About cooling the 5800X versus the 10700KF... Look, the 10700KF really does require better cooling to properly boost. However, if you're spending $450 on a CPU will you really go cheap on it's cooling system? Specially with AMD insinuating that the Wraith Spyre would not unleash the 5800X's full potential?
I don't think that you will spend $100 more in cooling by getting a 10700KF. So your build will also likely remain cheaper overall. If your sole purpose is gaming I don't think that long-term electricity bills will by themselves justify the more expensive option.
And look, I'm not an Intel fanboy. My gaming rig is Ryzen based, and the 5900X is the most appealing CPU available IMO. But I'm not an AMD fanboy either. I'm very annoyed by fanboyism.
That's why I started commenting here after getting quite bothered by people accepting a 20% price hike on the lower-end models and applauding AMD unconditionally as if they were cattle. It's because of fans like those (and corrupt press) that Intel and Nvidia kept milking customers generation after generation when they had no real competition.
I'm glad that Anandtech noticed the hike and interrogated AMD on this topic. Otherwise, it could have been part of the problem, such as Tom's Hardware saying "just buy it" about Nvidia's Turing, when that generation brought an almost null performance increase over Pascal, dollar per dollar.
I understand why you dislike Intel, and I dislike it too. But I don't think this is a good enough reason to unconditionally pander AMD.
getting quite bothered by people accepting a 20% price hike on the lower-end models and applauding AMD unconditionally as if they were cattle"
Not sure why? AMD had to artificially lower heir prices to compete with the Intel fanboys. The 1800X was launched at $499 I think, but within weeks was at $449, and within a few months was selling at $399.
AMD haven't been able to hold their price in the face of fools/idiots buying Intel, "cos its the fastest in'it"?
Even though AMD has been outselling Intel by 90% in market share, it has only been getting 60% of the total CPU spend (see Mindshare's charts). Intel is still raking it in, because consumers spend more with Intel. Look at the 7980XE; $2,000 !!!
If AMD is to succeed with Zen 6 and if there is to be a Zen 8, AMD needs that additional revenue, it needs to drive its R&D. Intel still outspends AMD on R&D by an order of several magnitudes. Intel's spend on R&D is more than AMD's entire income for the year!
Intel will recover, 2022 looks likely for 10nm to be ready, and even if it isn't Intel's 7nm will likely launch 2022/23 and that will likely beast AMD at 5nm, and unless you want there to be a return of Intel again in the driving seat for another 10 years of stagnation, you'll pay the slightly higher price, or you'll wait a few months for supply to outstrip demand and pay the lower price...
If you persist in demanding always lower prices, you'll be left with just Intel... Then you'll have reason to complain!
Rather than complaining abut AMD, maybe complain about the fools that have caused this; the idiots paying $2,000 for a gaming CPU that have given Intel a massive financial cushion so large they can lose 90% market share in the enthusiast space, and still not care! Its just like the idiots paying $1,500 for a GPU...
Its not AMD's fault that people are stupid, so complain about the stupids, not AMD!
"Intel will recover, 2022 looks likely for 10nm to be ready, and even if it isn't Intel's 7nm will likely launch 2022/23 and that will likely beast AMD at 5nm"
Good luck with Intel's 7nm competing with ryzen 3nm+ 8000 cpu series.
Really, like AMD was trying to beat Intel for the last 10 years. You think Intel will slap together a chip that will out do AMD in a few years. I think you are dreaming. Intel stuck with 14nm and milk as much as they can on consumers. Oh, they can't even do 10nm for that matter and you think 7nm cpu process. You are right, I don't want to pay $2000 intel 10cores cpu but I will buy 16 cores AMD for $800.
Yeah, I’ve got a B450 MB, Ryzen 3 3100, I wanted some 7nm, but as I increased my ambitions, I wound up with enough components to make another cheap computer. I should have waited till the 4000 series APU, mini PCs came out. $A600, I guess that’s $US440, for the bare bones, another $A400, $US300, for the laptop RAM 16GB, PCIe 3 flash 500GB, 1TB flash drive. So much less work and money, but it’s always this way, I can one day get a 5000 series APU.
Maybe I’ll get a 7nm graphics card, I was just tempted to go back into the game, by my iPad mini 5 having a 7nm chip, at 6.9 billion transistors and 5 trillion floating point operations, per second. Things haven’t changed much in the last 7 years. RAM is only double the speed, flash triple the speed, nearly quadruple the speed on the processor, those stupid case to motherboard pins, that you can hardly read, with glasses, a torch and a motherboard manual.
But I did get a factory reset down to 18 minutes, good fast memory, can pass even Microsoft’s bloat ware, through billions of transistors at teraflops, it’s still obsessing though, set top boxes, tablets are more convenient. A new XboxS, can crunch 5 teraflops, with it’s 16GB of GDDR6, 8CPU cores who knows how many GPU cores, fast flash, for $US 299 I think.
"Unlike an Intel CPU, you can save $100 just on the cooling!"
You can buy a Noctua NH-D15 for <$100 and cool any of these CPUs from either Intel or AMD. Not sure how you'd save $100 when the cooler costs less than that.
There was 0 good reason to buy X570 at launch and B550 barely launched in the last half year. The only people desperate for PCIe 4.0 wanted it for storage bandwidth, which is niche as can be. That leaves the people with a beta bios for their upgrade path. A good value proposition once it's done, but Rocket Lake will be out practically by the time those beta bioses are trustworthy.
"It may be better, but here are some reasons why I'd rather wait for an Intel product that won't be out until at least 2 months later and will almost certainly be slower with higher power draw".
$170 is an expensive motherboard? And that's a X570, not a lesser one, with all the features but the crazy RGB lights. Multiple M.2 PCIE 4.0, plenty of SATA, USB, etc. And a main brand, not one of the "who?" ones no one's ever heard of. Built two systems at the same time with this board, very happy with it and glad I didn't go for one of the way more expensive variations just to get more flashy RGB or a different pattern of colors on the heat sinks which I can't see anyway in the non-window cases. And glad I didn't go for a lesser feature B550, some of which sell for MORE than this X570 (go figure).
A $75 b450 also works. AMD's got it covered vs their competitor in the compatibility race, the pricing race, the performance race. Intel fangirls crying foul.
At the time of purchasing girls bathers, competition swimwear, and active wear includes something to suit all body shapes and sizes, with bold statement prints, girls bathers, contrasting textures, and beautiful lines. Our range includes everything from supportive swimsuits designed for active outings through to detailed and delicate bikinis for those girls racing swimwear, relaxed days by the beach. Made to be worn on the beach and in the water, the sleek styles suit the action of every adventure for girls swimwear. Australia market does consider their youth to get involved in these sports of swimming to build their nation strong and healthy. So they put top priority for businessmen and other investors like school and club to manufacture girls bathers and promote these activities. These businessmen put lots of effort into bringing new ideas and upgrading their product it impacts there to use their products. Government of Australia trying hard to groom up their kids. They also develop a number of swimming clubs to get register and get ready for swimming competitions. On the other hand, garment manufacture is also trying hard to sewing quality swimwear not just for only for adult trainers or boys but also for girls’ category and novaswimwear is leading in that field.
Really? A basic sub $90 AIO keeps the 10700k well below throttling temperatures and is easy to install. If you cant afford a $90 cooler you frankly cant afford a $300+ CPU.
Same for electricity. Electricity is CHEAP. The difference betweeen a 5700 and a 10700 will be maybe at WORST $10-15 a year for most people. Same as above, if that electrical cost is an issue to you you shouldnt be buying a $300 CPU in the first place.
When it comes to games, the AMD 3500 is NOT faster then a 10700k. I have 0 clue where you pulled that fact from.
Maybe where you live. You can't make that generalisation for a planet. And that just means the cost of producing has been cut somewhere in the supply chain you think you're benefitting from - probably coal or other environmentally destructive sources. Remember how "cheap" your electricity is when you next see news of wildfires and hurricanes... maybe coming to YOUR backyard soon.
It's being used in cars because it's ultimately cleaner. Full stop. If it was just about cost people would still be buying diesel, but that kills people with the exhaust nox and particulates. Did you see photos from all round the world during the lockdowns earlier this year of cities visible for the first time without all the choking smog? THAT'S why electricity in cars.
But my point was that "cheap" is an extremely relative term, and in some places it is relatively expensive, not subsidised, or stacked with taxes that reflect the environmental cost of production. The original poster is lucky, but only relatively so, because his "cheap" will likely come back to bite him or his children or grandchildren in the ass.
A basic sub $90 AIO keeps the 10700k well below throttling temperatures"
And yet, you only need a $30 one to keep an AMD CPU cool! The difference is because AMD CPU's don't produce 229 Watts of heat! The 10700K does!
"If you cant afford a $90 cooler you frankly cant afford a $300+ CPU"
So you're saying that the $60 extra you spend on the Intel cooler doen;t bother you... Okay, pay $60 now to the cats charity that Gamer Nexus supports. You can do that everyday and post the receipts to his channel. After all, if you can;t afford $0 you should have a CU right!
Hung by your own words - LOL!
"The difference betweeen a 5700 and a 10700 will be maybe at WORST $10-15 a year for most people"
Not sure what world you live in. On planet earth, PC on 2 hours a day burning an additional 100 watts. Assuming $0.25 per KWh, thats 50 cents a day, or $182.50 a year!
So now as that means nothing to you, please again donate to charity...
"When it comes to games, the AMD 3500 is NOT faster then a 10700k. I have 0 clue where you "pulled that fact from"
You must have difficulty with words, as I sad it would be if you tried sticking a $30 cooler on it. That's the same $30 cooler that would enable the AMD CPU top run at max, as its TDP is over 50% lower!
Not again today, please redo your math. According to your math someone with a 10700k used 2kw more power everyday. 100w/1kwh =0.1kwh multiplied by 2 gets you 0.2kwh. At $0.25 per kWh(us avg is between 0.10 and 0.15) that’s 5 cents a day. Or $18.25 at your inflated electricity prices.
Also 229-142 is equal to 87 watts not 100. At 25 cents per kWh and using the above math that’s $15.88 per year. Using a more reasonable 12.5 cents per kWh will gets you an extra $7.94 per year
And if someone can buy a 300 dollar cpu and not afford an additional 60 dollars, I would be concerned about their financial situation and recommend cutting back on their computer expenditures. Like Ryzen 3000 is awesome, and much cheaper, meaning better on a tight budget
Otritus, I think you failed at the math. If someone said the Intel cpu used 2kW more power every day, they likely meant 2kWh, which would mean the 10900K pulled ~ 80W more at the wall than the AMD. I am not making a judgement on whether the 2kWh number is accurate.
However, if accurate, the math would actually be (2kWh * $0.25) $0.50 per day or (2kWh * $0.50 * 365.25) ~ $182.63 per year.
For it to only be $18.25 more per year the wall difference would have to be only ~ 8W.
Calc76, you got about the same values I did at 87 watts for 2 hours a day. However, notagaintoday used 2 hours a day and 100 watts as an example, but quoted $182.5 vs 15 - 19 dollars(I used 365 days vs 365.25). So, I felt that they simply forgot to convert cWh to kWh. Which inflates prices by about the same order (x10). Your 24/7 usage seems similar to mine, although I didnt convert to 1 year pricing, so its a rough estimate.
During normal, everyday intensive gaming, the 10700k will never pass 120 watts. Ever. Regardless of the game. Unless all you do with your CPU is stress test it with Prime95.
Gio97BR. Get a clue, kid. You do realize all these prices are a click away. These are not political opinions on Twitter or something, everyone can fact check in seconds. And 4800x? 4600X? There is no such thing. WHy do this to your credibility, bruh? AMD already had the price/performance crown. Now they have the flagship crown AND the 5900 & 5950X, which smoke Intel's i9 10900s, are cheaper. I smell a butthurt Intel fan. Moving on....
"The 4800X is going to be $100 more expensive than the 10700K for the same core count and near identical gaming performance. The 6-core 4600X is going to be $40 more than the equivalent 10600K, and just $50 cheaper than the 8-core 10700K. It's simply nonsensical."
5800X and 5600X, but the point stands. Especially with very expensive X570 boards and no built-in business/backup graphics. Withou ~$150 discounts, these CPUs are not going to be a hit.
I think the big advantage of AMD is that you don't need new motherboard with every new chip release. AMD has been very good about keeping the same socket/motherboard for multiple generations.
But come on, now one has bought Intel since 5th Gen and actually expected any advantage. They've bought Intel because it was the fastest, and now AMD is the fastest...
Over the past few Generations people have moved on, leaving only Intel Fan Boys to keep buying Intel, that's why AMD has approaching 90% market share in the enthusiast space!
Jesus fuck, you really like to write out of your ass, don’t you? 90% enthusiast market share? In what utopian world is that even a possibility? “Intel Fan Boys” - this is the writing of someone who’s spiteful as hell.
So, what I'd say is that your argument is correct, but it doesn't apply to this release specifically, since it will be the last one on AM4. So people building from scratch right now will also have a dead-end platform.
"So people building from scratch right now will also have a dead-end platform"
Whilst that is true, it doesn;t seem to have stopped people buying Intel Z series motherboards these past few years. Every generation has quite literally been DOA, and even with Z490, Intel's newest platform, there is no guarantee that motherboard range will even get PCI-e gen 4 with 11th Gen Intel CPUs! Sure it might be on a few CPU's, and work with a few specific motherboards, but as you won't know which when you purchase, you;re at least getting some certainty with AMD...
Faster PCI-e Gen 4 and more PCIe lanes is a given on AMD (so more USB/SATA ports too), no matter what motherboard CPU/ combo you buy, and you can't say that of Intel...
I'm about to buy a fucking new PC, and what that guy says is correct. AM4 is dead end. X570 is last, Z590 will get chipset parity on X570 despite being a fucking DMI 3.0 but the fact is there's one more option for Z490 owners and these slides are nowhere showing massive boost on avg increase in FPS, it will reach Intel but not beat by a huge margin like how 3950X did to X299. And Intel is not going to cede everything to AMD on gaming, as it's their last stand SMT Is over for Intel with Zen 2 only, their new RKL will definitely beat this new lineup by single digit or double digits, still not much would be shown either due to 14nm and backport.
Intel Mobos are always 2 gen added with Tick Tock. So the buyers enjoyed top class gaming performance for years, until 2020 how are they EOL ? 8700K still performs excellently, the issue is with 7700K machines still they are not dead, fucking 2600K is still a CPU that can game, and if you want to make a point then that X370 is dead, stupid mobos with bs issues and they are dead end same for Zen and Zen+ and you have memory issues with Zen+ also on Intel none of them.
X470 had BIOS problems because no one trusted AMD, MAX mobos with more memory for BIOS is what people need. There's no b.s certainty or uncertainty here with Intel, PCIe 4 is useless for GPUs and SSDs are only way to see, the major advantage of X570 is chipset lane parity and I/O that's now coming to Z590. It's all about market, it's pointless to rave about how great Ryzen 5000 is and spreading Intel hate all over the place.
More SATA ports ? Care to show me which Mainstream top mobo has more than 8 SATA connections, none of them will have frigging high end only have 8, rest and many have 6 SATA.
lol - stating facts is now considered 'bullshit' and 'fanboyism'. Look in the mirror. AM4 socket has lasted for ages, still going. Can't go forever - Intel fanboys such as yourself know a LOT about changing sockets. You brought changing sockets up... now sink in the hypocrisy, fanboy.
You state, "it's pointless to rave about how great Ryzen 5000 is and spreading Intel hate all over the place."
Pure emotional projection. Cheering AMD is not "hating". An Intel fanboy might feel it this way, but that's not how psychology works. YOU defending Intel in the face of AMD supremacy is brand loyalty. We get it, you're butthurt. Too bad.
Spread your anger at Intel for screwing up their fab process for... idk how long and how far forward - but you can just read their press releases admitting to it. Direct that frustration at your idol, Intel - not the wearer of the crown, AMD.
What the matter when someone getting better stuff for cheap? I don't like neither Intel nor AMD to get that straight. When you have Intel with 4 cores forever over 10years and little or no improvement vs AMD trying to improve and they really put out to is improving for cheap, I will go with that. People says it can't be done with multi-cores doing better than what Intel have for the price, and AMD proving that is full of BS. If you think 14nm cpu is better go ahead. I am going to buy 5950x cpu when it is out and support whomever trying to improve latest tech. Everything I have from Intel are now dead end anyway. Like I said, i support people whom willing to improve and for now AMD.
From what I have read, this is expected to be the last generation on this socket. That is because they are expected to go with DDR5 for the next generation. So, while what you say is true, it doesn't seem to fit for these processors.
Assuming no price gauging on amd. 799-529 = 270 dollar. At electricity cost of 15 cents per kWh, you are looking at needing to consume 1.8mwh to equalize costs. 254-142 = 112 watts. 1.8mwh/112w gets you 16071 hours. Using your computer at full throttle 24 hours a day, it would take you 670 days to break even, or about 1 year and 10 months. Full throttle for 8 hours a day would take you 5.5 years to pay the different. At 4 hours a day it would be 11 years. As a proud owner of r5 1600af I am really disappointed by the r7 and r5 price hikes. Performance per dollar is either the same or lower, when we know amd can sell these chips for cheaper and make a healthy profit. Looks like my next build will have Ryzen 3000 in it b/c the price per dollar is intel like on these new 5000 series cpus
Kind of funny when Intel have i9 10cores for $2k now drop to $ 600. vs 3970x Threadrippers for same price $2k with 32cores. Now with 5950x with 16cores for $800 from the start. What a level drag Intel did all this time on consumers? I am going to buy 5950x just to show support for AMD and have lot of fun with multi-cores programs
Yeah, but I don't expect Zen 4 until the very end of 2021, possibly a staggered release into early 2022.
There have been rumors of a Zen 3(+) refresh (Warhol), maybe to introduce the new AM5 socket.
Whatever the case, there's plenty of time to release something (not Zen 4) in between March and December. Even if it's just another XT-like CPU that's 4% better.
Yeah, but I don't expect Zen 4 until the very end of 2021, possibly a staggered release into early 2022" That's funny, because AMD's road map shows mid 2021,on the AM5 socket. Its a totally new architecture so isn;t really ties to this release...
So unless you're Lisa Su, it appears you need to post less, and read more?
"So unless you're Lisa Su, it appears you need to post less, and read more?"
I know exactly where you're getting this info from, and it really isn't presented with that level of confidence or specificity. Perhaps take your own advice.
WOW! A price bump of $50.00. For a potential 19% increase in performance? May have to sell a kidney. Relatively expensive mobos, RAM?? RAM prices are decreasing across the board by 10%+. Anyone who has been paying attention to Zen progression and has common sense (OR does anything other than solely gaming) is most likely prepared to drop the new CPU's in their existing AM4 socket mobo. Despite Rocket Lake having PCIE 4 support, the z490 chipset doesn't, so Intel fanboys will be restricted to 1 PCIE 4 NVME and a GPU (or invest in yet another Intel chipset with PCIE 4 support and another motherboard. I applaud AMD in their advances AND consistency!! Go for the best bang for your buck is smart.
$50 is a 20% price hike between the 3600X and the 5600X, which is more than the performance uplift you're claiming to expect.
$50 is a lot, specially on the lower-end. On the higher-end it can be meaningless, specially since Intel has no competition to the 5900X and the 5950X.
But on the lower-end it can make AMD not be the best value for people whose only goal is to game.
AMD basically said "26% better gaming performance". Most of that is from the IPC improvement, but some is from higher clocks and the core complex die (unified 32 MB cache linked to 8 cores). Some non-gaming tasks should also see better than a 19% improvement.
Nobody wants price increases, but these will still fly off the shelves if the claims are true. Then the price will get lowered around the time Intel launches Rocket Lake (March 2021).
The presentation said that the new CPUs have 26% better gaming performance vs. Zen 2. If there is a 19% improvement in IPC, then clock speeds are going up by ~6% or something like that.
But on the lower-end it can make AMD not be the best value for people whose only goal is to game"
Not sure that's true anymore... The results AMD have released show they hold the fps crown... How true that is we will find out in just a few weeks, but can;t see it being a lie. Even at only 50% of what they claim in IPC, they woul still take the gaming crown Also, if you;re a gamer, you;re paying $300just for an entry 3060 class card, so noone is going to object to a $50 price hike... Just look at all those gamers lining up to give Nvidia £1,500 for a GPU that gives them a 10% increase in fps over the 50% cheaper card!
People gaming on a $500 budget are not the target market for any tech launch launching products on the bleeding edge of technological development; not AMD nor Intel nor Nvidia...
Also, see the mugs/fools that were paying $2,000 for the Intel 7980XE, as the AMD 5900X runs circles around that CPU, and is well over 60% cheaper!
"But on the lower-end it can make AMD not be the best value for people whose only goal is to game"
These new releases are upper-mid-range at the lowest, though - the 5900X and 5950X are ultra-high-end as far as gaming is concerned. For anyone who just wants to game with decent frame-rates on a budget, they can just go ahead and buy a 3000 series CPU, and they'll have the option to replace it with a higher-end 5000 series CPU later when the price comes down.
I keep forgetting that those last few gaming FPS are what really matter.
So - if AMD has at last reached Intel in this key metric (they blew past everything else long ago) - they should charge less?
Typical attitude - it's not enough that AMD saved us from generations of milking an stagnation, and makes CPUs that are far better almost across the board. They have to be more than perfect to challenge the magnificent Intel, regardless of how degraded the latter has become and of what it did to us.
More money for more performance seems fair. I'll be waiting for the release and reviews, then choosing between a Ryzen 5 5600X and an outgoing 3000 series.
"but those price increases along with relatively expensive B, X mobo's" Wait, what? There's one competitor - Intel. You're a butthurt Intel fan no doubt. With AMD's new 5000 series - the new gaming king has arrived and unlike Intel a new motherboard IS NOT required. Use your brain. EVeryone already knows this. AM4 400 and 500 motherboards ARE compatible as AMD announced long ago this backward compatibility. Intel - no, need new motherboard every time out to upgrade. And.... only 105W power consumption. Costing more than Intel? Are you dense. They cost less... for better performance. I suspect someone here failed in maths hard. As for RAM, regardless if you want AMD or Intel if you want faster RAM and therefore faster performance you sometimes pay for it. Although a simple comparison shows there is little cost difference from 3000 to 3600. Again, someone's an Intel fan crying and can't stand this. Fortunately... facts matter.
They didn't just "catch up", they appear to have an on-average gaming performance advantage of around +≈10%, or even MORE than the i9-10900K had over the R9 3950X. And absolute utter performance & efficiency DOMINANCE everywhere else. That's EASILY worth the extra $20 to get an R9 5900X over a i9-10900K. Also more "non-X"/65W SKU's are almost surely on their way at some point. Most likely a R5 5600 at $249, with the R7 5700X at $399.
As a consumer my goal is to get the best value out of my hardware. Feature-set, pricing, thermal output, and performance are all calculations that go into this calculus.
For AMD's mainstream r5 we are seeing a 0% increase in performance per dollar due to higher pricing at msrp. Using 3600x retail pricing to 5600x msrp, we are seeing a DECLINE in performance per dollar. The increase in pricing counteracts the increase in performance and decrease in thermal output for me, meaning Ryzen 5000 has worse value. r5 is supposed to be a value king (think i5 750 and 2500k), but it is priced too high to do so. At $250 this would be an amazing chip, so I am disappointed by amd.
Additionally, every time a manufacturer launches a solid new architecture better than the old, we see a roughly 20% improvement in performance per dollar, see Nehalem and Sandy Bridge or (even higher on) Zen. Don't be a fanboy to try and defend moves that are bad for the consumer. We should all demand better from Intel, Amd, and Nvidia to try to get the best value we can out of our hardware.
These are the X versions of the chips - they're not meant to be the "value king". The non-X variants will follow later, and if you care most about performance per dollar then you'll wait.
All of your examples of great value are chips that came out long after the initial release and/or dropped in price significantly after launch. You're comparing fresh apples to stale oranges.
Wait, wait, wait... Nehalem to dandy bridge was 7+ years ago, since then Intel hasn't had ANYTHING close to 20%+ performance increase generation to generation
I think the impact of the price increases might be overstated or felt more by those who've been following things closely, whereas it might fly under the radar for many who just get drawn in by the prospect of next gen stuff and AMD finally catching up on IPC.
I'm probably somewhere in the middle, but I'm not gonna lie, my i5 6700K is getting long in the tooth and I couldn't care less whether a 5800X or 5900X is $50 more or less than it "should be", it's looking mighty appealing either way.
1. AMDs DDR4 vs INTELs DDR5, dead on launch. 2. ! Single digit ! percentage gains VS CURRENT comparable INTEL cpus? Dead on launch. 3. 12 core AMD cpu has 15 % better performance then 10 core(20% less cores) CURRENT INTEL cpu. Dead on launch
Intel don't have a DDR5 chip on desktop and there isn't one coming within the next year. The increases are around 15%, *and at lower power*. The final comparison is *single core performance*, so you'll be looking at 30-40% performance advantage overall in applications that use all cores.
Nice motte-and-bailey there. I factored that into my estimate, but the fact is that it's that "igor" here was using AMD's core count advantage in an attempt to deflect from a *single-core performance advantage*, which is patently false no matter what the situation with the multiple cores.
The problem you just stated applies equally to both AMD and Intel too, so 🤷♂️
way to comments to read, min thing i am looking at is the single CCX design as that alone should remove the latency gap that you have with the 2x4 core setup of thhe 1000-3000 cpus when the process has to use the other 4 cores
as the L3 Cache is not shareable and has to do a L3 copy to keep cache in sync, the 8 core CPUs wont have to do this and on the 12-16 core parts there only be 2 ccx groups not 4 so they have lower latency as well on top of having 32MB L3 cache available total, not 64MB as that is shared
You do realise that that comment will definitely attract the ire of fanboys of both Intel and AMD and that you will be single handedly starting a war in the comments, right?
There are no neutrals. Neutral actions implicitly support the status que of whoever controls them. Fools who attempt neutrality end up collateral damage. You are either with us or against us.
Choose! What will it be? Intel? Amd? Nvidia? Apple? RISC-V?
If you do not relocate to an armed camp immediately you will be easy meat for roving bands are partisans.
I see we are in agreement, and you have made the educated decision to join the my side! The correct side. You see we have god, science, and education on our side! and flamers. Lots of flamers.
So before we launch our attack to genocide the enemy, we need to gather resources. There are some folks over their trying figure things out. Lets wipe them out and take their stuff while they are still confused.
Price cuts 1st? Not like Intel can't afford it since they've been getting their prices for a decade now. Many people will still grab an equal Intel CPU/mobo if it's less than the new AMD's. I could go either way on my next build.
"AMD raising its launch prices decreases pressure on Intel to lower their own prices." - wrong.
AM4 socket still applies. AMD already has the better price performance across the board with any competing CPU from $88 to $250 with the 3000 series. WHat AMD did not have was the gaming performance crown. Now they do. Yes, they jumped the 5000 series $50. Still cheaper than the competition. Or maybe people would rather pay over $1000 for Intel's best 10900 series which is slower.
You be the judge.
This is a slam dunk win by AMD. Same socket with AM4. Better performance for price in real world applications. Better performance AND price for single core aps and/or gaming.
Intel, like AMD, will survive being in 2nd place (obviously... Intel is a tech giant with their hand in soooo many tech baskets) - but the CPU king is AMD.
Tech changes faster than anything. Today is not tomorrow or yesterday. If you buy today... you buy what's best for today with considerations for tomorrow. That being said... a true Intel fan might want to wait for Intel's next offering. And they might be dissappointed with Intel's ongoing fab problems with 14nm and opening up with issues they're having with 10nm too. Or, you could wait for AMD to hit 5nm with their next up. Or you could wait 5 or 10 or 20 years and laugh at ALL of today's CPUs THEN! Reminds me of the Ostrich Effect... sticking head in sand. Too bad it doesn't make today go away (or tomorrow). AMD is the new king. Open your eyes and face the reality.
If you don't want to look like a rabid fanboy, perhaps don't jump at someone posting an obvious joke comment? Seriously, do you think they honestly believe that "PowerPoint presentation slides per second" is a real-world benchmark? It's a joke about the lengths Intel will go to to show "performance leadership".
Intel doesn't currently have any way of retaking the crown if this is accurate. They will have to increase clocks, and power (heat) to try match AMD in gaming, but AMD will be more efficient, and do most everything else noticeably better.
Indeed. It's like asking a question - 'well what if Intel uses their time machine and just starts using their technology from the year 2030?" - They will blow AMD out of the water. Oddly enough physics and reality doesn't quite work that way.
You mean Their 10nm Desktop CPU that will be released on 2021 that has a 5% IPC disadvantage and is capped at 8 cores? Intel can't compete with ZEN 3 until 2022 and... by that time they would be fighting against yet another beast 5nm ZEN 4
Well it would be more efficient which helps with everything, but you can only speculate at this point. AMD has made a significant jump, and Intel can't do anything just yet. They have been behind schedule, and are now firmly behind the 8 ball. This won't destroy Intel just like Intels dominance over AMD for a decade didn't destroy AMD. Intel will sell lots of chips for a long time, and aren't going anywhere, but they don't have any real advantage for gamers if this info is accurate.
10 nm superfin is shipping in high volume products at 4.8 Ghz, and according to Intel engineers can clock even higher. It has roughly a 5% frequency deficit, which can easily be overcome through microarchitectural tweaks that boost ipc, or a new microarchitecture dramatically boosting ipc. Intel's 10nm woes are effectively over, now it is simply a matter of building more capacity. 7nm on the other hand, is delayed and underperforming by ~ 12 months, and 7nm products have been delayed by ~ 6months.
1) Define "high volume". 2) If it can clock higher, why isn't it? 3) 5% *IPC* deficit. 4) "easily overcome" vs. "new microarchitecture" - pick one, they can't both be true. 5) If their woes are over, why does their best quad-core 10nm++ chip need 50W at boost? Why aren't there any of the 8-core chips out? Why is availability still so low? 6) If 7nm is delayed by 12 months, how are products only delayed by 6?
There's not a single friend of mine who work at Intel would agree with anything you just wrote, Otritus. They know they have nothing to compete currently, and won't when Zen 4 arrives. By then Zen 5, 6 and 7 designs will be deep in design.
If these figures are accurate then the IPC of the cores in Rocket Lake is still ~5% lower than Zen 3. We have no idea how high they'll be able to clock it, but it's an absolute guarantee that it will draw more power at ~4.8Ghz and they'll only go up to 8 cores. They'll have to price it low to compete, but the die size will be comparatively huge... Not a good spot for Intel to be in.
They certainly will. Tiger Lake at 4.8 GHz single core nets just 595 and that is while being fed 50W while in boost for just a quad-core. There is a definite IPC deficit (-5-6% less than Zen 3) on Intel's side of the court even with Intel's latest and greatest Tiger Lake. Even with the expected 5.0 GHz boost for Willow Cove in Rocket Lake in March 2021, they would be lagging at 620 points in Cinebench compared to the 5900X's 631. And that's not even bringing up the 5950X's 640+ score.
Just remember that different applications tax processors differently, so you'll need a wider range of tasks to accurately determine ipc. It is why intel gets away with saying they are better at gaming and "real-world tasks" (tasks that care more about frequency than ipc), and includes AVX-512 for that AI boost that every gamer is clamoring for /s.
But there certainly seems to be a general ipc deficit on intel, and with amd traditionally doing better in tasks related video rendering and encoding, we'll probably see them really run up their lead in productivity suites. Kudos to amd for retaking the ipc crown for the first time since sunny cove dethroned zen 2.
Had to say not a big fan of raising the price when the only benefit is better at gaming. I'd expect they do more when they say "changed the cache topology". AMD might reach some bottleneck, but nevertheless, still good effort
You missed nothing. Gaming is a benchmark in this sense. AMD already had simpler real world application leads across the price/performance band and in multi-core usage. The market still saw Intel winning due the gaming edge for single/dual/quad core usage which games make more use of. Thus, today AMD announces and stresses this is no longer the case and AMD now also rules this gaming roost. It could not be more obvious to those in tech news and hardware fans why this facet of CPU competition is stressed in marketing as we see.
Seems pretty vague to me. If I remember correctly, the gcc compilation improvement is single digit. The Adobe stuff seems not only related to IPC but their software. I bet others like Matlab or python scripts will also be marginally better
Only Benefit Is Gaming? how about 19% IPC in Rendering"
If only! Adobe was on one slide, shown briefly in passing. I think it said an 11% increase in performance over the 3950X. But abode is such a niche case. I and all the video editors I know (weddings etc). use MKV, (to add in srt subtitles, multi-layered audio tracks, thumbnails etc.) and Adobe doesn't support mkv.
Trying to find any website/You Tuber that posts rendering benchmarks in Handbrake etc. is really hard. Still no 3090/3080 handbrake HEVC (level 5.1) benchmarks anywhere, and what we're now a month after launch?
I have a 3950X, but the IPC seems too small for me to upgrade in this release cycle, but then again I'm guessing as no benchmarks!
IPC is not a consistent improvement across applications. If it was the 9900k would not have held the gaming crown over the 3800x. That 19% general improvement could be 30% in rendering, or 5% in rendering. The point is we dont know, but a 15 to 25 percent improvement can definitely be expected.
Intel 10700K, 8 core CPU - $451 (converted from actual Amazon UK today) - TDP 229 Watts (peak for 5 Ghz, 250+ Watts for 5.1 Ghz)) AMD 5800X - 8 core CPU - $449 - TDP 129 Watts (peak - using both PBO 11 & PBO 2, assuming similar to 3800x)
So that's the same price for a faster AMD CPU that will use 50% less electricity, and reduce your AC needs in summer by a similar amount as you won't need to move all that hot air from your home......
But wait, can you get a 10700K? No, its vaporware! Amazon UK suggest delivery by 4th November, maybe!
So comparison is more like:
9700K - 8 core, $400+ no hyper-threading, a motherboard platform that is already declared EOL by Intel, and a TDP of ???
By amd's own admission that 105 watt tdp processors will pull up to 142 watts not 129. So the 5800x has only an 87 vs 100 watt lead. I really do wish manufactures would market tdp based on max power draw because we know coolers rated for the default tdp is leaving performance on the table without tweaking.
Since AMD claims 24% performance per watt improvement and claim 26% performance improvement it's a safe bet to say that the power consumption will be almost exactly the same as the 3000 series. So that means we can just go back to the Anandtech review and see that the 5900X/5950X will consume about 120W during stress test, and 142W peak. And the 5600X/5800X will consume about 75W during stress tests, and 92W peak. Gaming is not a peak load test for any Ryzen CPU so expect the stress test average (120W/75W) from the Anandtech review of the 3000 series CPU to be almost exactly what we'll see with the 5000 series.
It's always funny when companies do lists that are basically "a list where we win". It's like the Intel Thunderbolt 4 checklists that are 90% "is Thunderbolt 4".
The $50 increase for price and the -100MHz base clock across the board is strange, would this perhaps have anything to do with switching to 8 cores vs 4?
The absence of the 5700X and the 5600 are also strange. Would they come later or will they not be launched this generation so the 3600 and 3700X could coexist with the 5000 series?
No, not really. They have been raising prices every gen, and even their mobo's no longer have a real mid range with relatively expensive mobo's. Hopefully Intel will have sales now, and that will force AMD to lower prices a bit. We all know that whatever the gaming claims are, at 1440p+, it's only a few FPS in most situations.
$75 dollar for an AM4 socket motherboard which can use the 5000 series is "no mid range"? I mean, true, 70 bucks is typically referred to as entry level but wtf are you babbling? I mean, you do realize this is not some political argument where emotions and 'feels' mean anything, right? That's the nice thing about tech news - everyone is a click away from facts. The options for AMDs 5000 series are the same as for their 3000s (and some of the 1000s and 2000s). AM4 socket has served for a long, long time - saving heaps for millions. No socket lasts forever (just ask Intel which switches far more over the past couple decades). That, and they've got offerings for rich and poor and everyone between. All bases are covered for AMD. Facts are cool. Try them! :)
You write about facts and then suggest a 75$ MB to go with a 500$ CPU? You’re fucking retarded and i had just about enough of you AMD hornets. Go enjoy whatever the fuck makes you happy and stop behaving like you have a clue. Because you obviously don’t.
Someone seems irrationally invested in this. The claim was that AMD have "no mid range" motherboards, it was demonstrated to be hilariously false, you just moved the goalposts.
Proving once more that people who use the r word to insult the intelligence of others are just projecting.
one store i go to for comp hardware has 40 boards that are $200 CDN or less. i would say thats a good range for low end to midrange. would most on here pit a $500 cpu in one of those ? probably not, but the fact is still there, amd does have boards that would fit the mid range group.
If it turns out that each of the CPUs offers the "best gaming performance" in its class, they can afford to charge a further premium for that bragging right alone. At least for a couple of months, until Intel responds with Rocket Lake, or AMD makes pre-emptive price cuts just before that.
Having +$50 prices to start off, they can reduce them -$50 just before Rocket Lake launches.
- Collect higher revenue per CPU for 3 months - End up at the same price points as 3000 series - Look like the better value by the time Rocket Lake is reviewed.
Remember 3000 series was unofficially price cut below msrp, so 5000 series is not great on the value front. Your win-win-win proposition is correct from the perspective of AMD, but as a consumer it reduces the value that I am receiving.
Considering how amd has cut prices before every major intel launch, and intel already planning on delivering worse perf/dollar to the pre price-cut amd processors, I wonder if Intel is going to jebait AMD this time around because they have been completely toppled from the top of the market.
It really isn't a win, at least on the lower-end models. $50 is 20% of the MSRP of a 3600X.
Thus, the new entry-model 5600X is 20% more expensive than a 3600X was on its release, and 50% more expensive than the 3600 was. That seems a lot for 20% more performance generation on generation, specially given it has been more than a year since those two CPUs were released.
The 5600X's MSRP, as a matter of fact, is closer to the i7-10700KF's price than to the i5-10600KF's. And the 10700KF is $100 cheaper than the 5800X.
All of that for near identical gaming performance (a 7% lead is small, specially once you factor that was comparing a 12-core AMD CPU to a 10-core Intel part).
I don't think that there is much justification for such a price hike on the lower-end, where productivity matters less and additional $50 hurts more.
Interesting to see multiple accounts posting this exact same narrative 🤔 Is it performance leadership, or is it not? After all, that mattered when Intel had it and then now... it doesn't.
At the msrp of the 3600x, the 5600x's 19% ipc improvement has an actual Decline in perf/dollar. Using the street pricing of the 3600x, this effect is even more pronounced. I wish for a return to the old days when new architectures would boost performance and performance per dollar by 15 to 30 percent. And with the 10600k being the cheapest chip that doesnt really leave gaming performance on the table, this 299 msrp doesn't change that (300 vs 280 dollars). At an msrp of $249 the 5600x would be great value (and the cheapest "best" gaming chip), and at $219 it would be an absolute steal.
Obviously AMD wants to upsell the higher priced parts first to enthusiast early adopters. E.g. by most reviewers' account, the 3600X was a waste of money compared to 3600, 3800X compared to 3700X.
If the lower SKUs are on the way (likely), they'll come 2 months later, or something.
Not having those budget-oriented options in the in-between price brackets may also help to temporarily bolster pricing on the 3000 series parts - less need of drastic price cuts for now.
This. There's also an obvious 5700(X)-sized gap in the chips they announced today; though I'm not sure exactly how they'll fill it - maybe 8 core, split across 2 CCX - more L3 cache (though it wouldn't surprise me if some of it was disabled, either for perf reasons or to allow use of chips where there were lithography problems there) which helps with some workloads but hurts in others? It'd let them use dies with problems in up to 50% of the cores and probably make more money than they would selling the same chip as part of a Ryzen 3 part.
Disregard the manufacturer TDP values. They're fudged from an equation with arbitrary values plugged in, and mean very little. The most you can do is take them as a hint for what the intended use case is (high powered desktop versus mainstream desktop).
Refer to 3rd party reviews for power consumption and cooling requirements instead.
For 12 and 16 core part you can generally expect the actual power consumption to be about 120W during stress tests. AMD claimed a 24% performance per watt improvement, and a similar performance uplift so power consumption should be the exact same as previous generation. Same is true for the 6 and 8 core parts so expect the same 75W power consumption during stress test as the 3000 series.
Gamers Nexus did a piece last fall on the AMD TDP and the equation that they use to derive the value. (Or really: The equation where by messing around with the input values, they get out the TDP they wanted all along.) (Search for: "gamers nexus ryzen tdp deep-dive".)
TDP (Watts) = (tCase°C - tAmbient°C)/(HSF θca)
It involves choosing ambient and operating temperatures and a theta value that represents the thermal resistance of the cooling setup (lower is better).
You can either read the article, or watch the video with the same content on YouTube.
Power limits applied using operation are separate from the TDP (although usually aligned with it more or less closely). TDP is meant to signal the cooling requirements, as per the term "Thermal Design Power".
No offense to Steve but his piece was and is quite irrelevant. The 3900X uses about 120W during stress testing (142W peak), and the 3700X uses about 75W during stress testing (92W peak). Those are the numbers from Anandtech review, you know the page you're actually commenting on here. The 5900X and 5800X will match that almost exactly. If anything it'll be slightly lower, not higher.
There are benefits and drawbacks in both (besides the obvious core and thread count differences):
5900X: (+) 2x total L3 cache (+32MB) (but still only 32MB accessible by each core) (+) lower core density per area ⇒ lower heat density ⇒ potentially higher clocks under load (+) higher maximum boost frequency (+100MHz) (+) average or better than average silicon (of the lot that has 6 - 7 intact cores) ⇒ better frequency, frequency/voltage and frequency/power characteristics (+) double the total bandwidth to and from the I/O die (and by extension, system memory) (the bandwidth for an individual core is still the same)
5800X: (+) higher base frequency (+100MHz) (+) lower average core-to-core latency if a task with many threads would end up split across dies on the 5900X (if task requires or benefits from more than 16 threads, this becomes largely moot point) (-) will use lower quality silicon (of the lot that still has all 8 cores intact) (the uses for even lower quality ones would be limited to lower priced 8-cores ("5800", "5700X" or "5700"), or maybe budget 6 or 4-core CPUs for the worst) (+) lower price
All together, if your priorities lie solely in gaming, video consumption and light productivity tasks (social media), 5800X will be plenty. I don't think the 5900X will be worse, though - it's different but also more expensive.
Well it will go pricier and definitely will kick prev gen prices and Intel 10th gen prices down. As 10400f user, I can't wait to get 10700f at bargain price.
Good luck with that - Intel don't have the best record for reducing existing prices. They tend to just release "new" CPUs that require a "new" motherboard and chipset and reduce the prices on those.
It's hard not to be disappointed by the pricing, but I suppose I should have expected this. Hopefully in another year, Intel will be able to exert enough competitive pressure to drive these prices more in line with the 3000 series.
Yeah why not, how about we play old titles ? PS5 says PSN is all you have. Xbox on the otherhand has some advantage on that, and PC is not just a gaming machine. It's a Computer.
Really? Before Ryzen Intel was charging $1000 for a 8 Core Processor, you should thank Amd for lowering prices so Peasants like you can get their hands on a 8 Core Desktop CPU
Not keen on the price increases accompanying a lower base clock and no cooler. Intel's been milking the market for years with exorbitant pricing on higher-core products. The appeal of Ryzen was that it put the brakes on this, and we finally got to stick it Intel for bilking us for so long. (The 50% price drop in the i9s the moment competition appeared was particularly offensive/hilarious.) But now we've got an 8-core chip at $450? It wasn't long ago that the 2700X was $160 at retail. Even today, a 3800X is $350. Just because Intel decided 8 cores was so premium to merit $500 doesn't mean AMD should follow their example.
Both companies are known to price gouge when they have a good product. This isn't AMD's first time beating Intel. Last time AMD had desktop chips in the $1300 range.
If AMD charges the same prices as Intel, what does it matter if AMD has caught up to Intel? Now you're just getting double teamed instead of getting raped by Intel alone.
It's funny how they artificially limit the 1 thread turbo frequency on low end parts, to ensure that higher end parts with a lot more cores can perform better in games. Otherwise, they'd be identical.
Not intending to start a war and out of a genuine curiousity, did anyone else notice that they used an Nvidia 2080ti for their testing? I would've expected them to use a Radeon...
They used the highest performant graphic card now that they don't want to show their hand with big navi yet. 5700xt would make new processor looks bad.
AMD's got to be pretty confident in their performance claims with the MSRP they're putting out there. With Zen/Zen+/Zen 2, the deal was more cores + bundled cooler for the money (offset somewhat by higher motherboard pricing).
Now they're asking slightly more than Intel's 10th gen parts, and they don't throw in a cooler (above the 5600X, that is). Frankly, even if the 20% IPC uplift holds, there's going to be a lot of situations where it makes sense to get a Zen 2 part, particularly if there's reasonable discounts (Zen+ sometimes could be had for ~50% off after Zen 2 launched; I doubt that'll happen here but even at 30% off you could go a model "up" and get similar perf in some benchmarks at a lower cost.)
I think that's the idea. They give retailers a chance to drain down old stock at non-bargain-basement prices before they fill out the range with the second-tier chiplets.
Does anyone know if the Ryzen 7 2700X will work with B550 motherboards? It seems like this is a best buy right now, but I want to buy a B550 motherboard. Thanks
If I were you I'd probably wait to see what Intel dies with rocket lake. That being said if you needed to upgrade by the end of November then sure go ahead
They'd have to go above 5Ghz - they could barely do that with Skylake, and it doesn't look like their new cores clock that high (though we've only seen them on 10nm+ / ++). They're also larger and thirstier, so even if they can hit the speeds needed to beat AMD on 14nm+++++, they'll be doing it with *obscene* power draw.
I am waiting for the NON-X processors like a 5600 to replace the 3600. All the X does is increase the price as you can currently overclock a 3600 to a 3600X. Same with the 3700 to 3700X.
8 core is in a tricky place. Article mentioned 3700X as best selling, but then mentions an MSRP increase which seems to be based off the 3800X. The price delta from 3700X is much bigger given the absence of 5700X at this time. I want an 8 core, but I don't want the 5800X price or power.
The performance seems very good on the high-end, but I really think that the price hike hurts the value proposition of the cheaper models (5600X and the 5800X).
The 5900X has two more cores than the 10900K and its gaming lead is still just 7%. So I guess that a 8-core 5800X will have almost zero advantage, gaming-wise, over a 8-core 10700KF, and the same goes true for the 5600X vs. the 10600KF.
The 10700KF retails for $349. That's $100 less than the 5800X's MSRP and just $50 more than the 6-core 5600X's MSRP. The 5600X will cost $60 more than the equivalent 10600KF. All of that cash for an almost null gaming advantage?
On the higher-end models, such as the 5900X and the 5950X, AMD has no real competition and the $50 hike is less significant, proportionally. Also, productivity matters more and, on that regard, AMD's lead is insane, both on multi and single-core performance.
But on lower-end, gaming focused builds... Intel will offer the same gaming performance for 20% less money. It's a shame for AMD to lose that crown. It can't even rely on the argument that it's platform has better upgradeability since it's the last refresh on AM4.
I think AMD can end up losing some of its DIY sales leadership for such a small mistake.
I don't understand that either, +50$ accross the range doesn't make sense. 20% more for the affordable 3600x options and 10% for high end 3900x? Nvidia charges two times the price of RTX 3080 for a 3090 that is 15% faster as dismissing return would be. Is this 'increasing return' in AMD case?
I thought the same thing about the "increasing returns". The 5900X seems like the better value, the 5800X the worst one.
5600X - $300 - 6 cores - $50 per core 5800X - $450 - 8 cores - $56 per core 5900X - $550 - 12 cores - $45 per core 5950X - $800 - 16 cores - $50 per core
I don't know if they are trying to push people into the more powerful and (expensive) parts, but the cheaper ones are just oddly priced with that linear $50 increase.
Each processor has a fixed cost for the I/O Die + packaging. A working 8 core die is more valuable than a 6 core which (probably) contains defective cores. Try running the math again but assume something like $50 retail to cover the fixed costs.
RTX3090 does not offer only more cores than RTX3080, but much more. 24GB of memory and NVlink allow this board to be used for professional usage, something 3080 cannot. It's a different product completely, not just a "bit faster one". If you buy a 3090 for +15% in gaming you are wasting those 85% more than it can give you with professional programs. And doubling the crunching power when paired with another one for content creation.
It's up to you (and your pocket) to decide if it is a good option. But comparing a 3090 to a 3080 just for gaming and saying it is a overpriced product indicates a lack of understanding.
Nvidia gimped it in a few significant ways though... FP16 w/FP32 accumulation is 1:2 ratio vs 1:1 on the old RTX Titan, so not nearly as good for deep learning as it could have been. Also no pro drivers where that matters. Where it shines is rendering like Blender, video editing with lots of layers etc. but it really is an overgrown Geforce card. When they launch the RTX 3080 20GB version it'll be 85% of a RTX 3090 in pretty much every respect.
"The 5900X has two more cores than the 10900K and its gaming lead is still just 7%. So I guess that a 8-core 5800X will have almost zero advantage, gaming-wise, over a 8-core 10700KF"
Why? The 10900K has higher boost clocks than the 10700KF, and the vast majority of games don't scale past 6 cores. Seems to me like you're making inaccurate inferences to draw incorrect conclusions.
The extra two cores have NOTHING to do with the 5900x's lead over Intel, did you watch the presentation? AMD's single thread/single core performance is now better than Intel's, especially at gaming.
"Anand once said a very insightful phrase to me - There are no bad products, only bad prices.” - Man, I've been reading articles on Anandtech for the past 22 years. This genuinely brought a tear to my eye.
I am a game middleware developer and would be very interested in some C++ build benchmarks. Unreal Engine, CryEngine, Lumberyard and Godot are all available on GitHub, so a benchmark measuring the build time of those would be very cool!
The price for their top of the line CPU has gone up each zen refresh. The 1800x was below the $499 msrp quickly after launch. It seems like the chiplet design is NOT cheaper for the consumers.
The 1800X only had performance leadership in applications that could use all of the cores. So yeah, as their position has improved, so have the prices they're asking for them. That gets poured into more R&D.
The alternative is that AMD keep prices low, then Intel slowly throttle them with the colossal R&D budget financed by their "friendly" (read as: captive) OEMs.
Just a question: what's the meaning of adding a X suffix to all the models? Shouldn't X means something different than those that have not? Or it is just there as X means "eXtra" and allows for a higher price?
Slightly off-topic, but is there any insight into when we might hear more about AMD's next-gen chipsets that will support DDR5 memory that will play nice with these latest processors?
Nope. Not on AMD. It's in the I/O die. Rumour has it that there will be a zen3+ with a new I/O die able to run DDR5 but use the same zen3 chiplets as these just announced.
Going from Zen 2 to Zen 3 shouldn't be too painful for a lot of people. It has the same RAM support, so will work fine with a decent kit, and memory is hardly expensive now if it becomes necessary to eke out a little bit more performance. Assuming cooling requirements haven't gotten too extreme, that old cooler could have a new lease of life. Even 400-series owners can join in, albeit only when the necessary BIOS updates are made available within a couple of months after launch (and assuming PCIe 4.0 isn't required). Given that I'm stuck with an RX 590, my 3600 is quite underutilised, so I won't be forking out for Zen 3 for at least the majority of its lifespan, but given it's a drop-in upgrade for a mature platform, some people might literally need to just buy the CPU, install it, and that's them done. We won't be able to do that with Zen 4.
Raise prices more. 660m TTM net income is crap with 20% share of x86 vs. Intels 80% making 23.6B NET INCOME. AMD should be making 5B+ net income right now! The last time they made a billion NET INCOME quarter was Dec2009 (NVDA had 4 1B+ Q's 2018, their stock price then 240-280, ridiculous today at 3.3B TTM, should be making 8B at 550-600 or WTH??), and they haven't made a BILLION YEAR since. It is comic the share price is where they should be if they WERE making ~5-6B on that 20% market share, but instead they make PEANUTS. Because of great products with BAD PRICING. Time to up next gen $100 each especially if you make it to 5nm at TSMC before Intel. I might say 150ea (across the whole lineup, put them ON TOP of this 5000 series, not replace them!) if you use that 5nm to GROW the chip on the gpu side on some models as your share should be near 30% in 12mo if you keep making KINGS like Dirk Meyer said in 2011 when you fired him for it...LOL. You can see, you charge for KINGS, the losers get discounted from day 1.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/... https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/... Dec 2009 when they had that 1B+ quarter the stock was $9 (pretty much the high from 2008-2016). Shares have diluted 2x. So basically your share is worth half of that 9 if they still had that 1B QUARTER today. But today it takes them 4 quarters (TTM) to make 660mil. Now remove the fabs, most assets (old leased lands sold off to survive etc).
IE 2006, they had 13.5B assets, now just hit 6.5B 2020 (were 3B 2015! OUCH!). So terrible income vs. 2009 Q4, 1/2 assets today vs, 14yrs ago, outstanding shares doubled (that's like saying your $100 bill in your pocket is only worth 50 now!) and on and on. Quit making console crap with single digit to mid teens margins (AMD said it multiple times first gen, see no different this time), and direct that R&D to KING cpu/gpu ALWAYS. NV passed stating it robs from core R&D, so they won gpu last 7yrs since console R&D started basically right? AMD watts/heat/noise always off if perf close, and usually everything off vs. NV and lost the cpu race for that same time until recently with ryzen. Stop wasting time on console chips made for $95-110 last gen and you making $10-15. Start making reticle limit gpus and larger cpus so you can charge like NV/INTC and make NET INCOME like them too! This isn't rocket science. KINGS price like KINGS. It is a massive mistake AGAIN that AMD didn't go to reticle limit at TSMC while NV couldn't do it at samsung do to yields on 8nm (forced under 630mm^2). You could have been king, but went stupid again. No raising prices for you on that small shat that will be discounted from day 1 vs. nvda. You should have upped the bandwidth (256/384busses) and went to 800mm^2+ and CHARGED for it. Instead your new gpus already 2nd rate, slow mem, slow bus, low bandwidth, small, shenanigans to make up for it being explained right and left. 192bit for a flagship in 2020 with GDDR6? When you design a loser, expect loser pricing. With 256/384bit and a reticle limit you'd be winning everything at 1080p and laughing about $100 more than NV's 3090 price tag and calling it a bargain as you smoked them with 800mm^2 on a arguably BETTER 7nm TSMC vs. Sammy 8n yield issue process right?
Again, make some better moves Lisa Su, who made 59mil for 660mil NET INCOME for the last 12 months. Shareholders should be asking her why she isn't making 6B NET INCOME for AMD at that wage. See other CEO's. Intel for example 23.6B Swan made 66mil. Uh, that don't look so good for Lisa right? Intel's ceo barely beating her but like, 50x NET INCOME for company. He's earning it, she's...Well they're going in the right direction, but the stock should be $2-4 at 660mil. I just proved it. There is far more stats, look at 15yrs of data there at macrotrends. Nobody should be whining about AMD charging more for a winning cpu, and if they don't the stock deserves a massive tanking back to 2008-2016 prices for all the reasons above. Someone explain this math to me for today's share price. Is AMD hiding billions of net income yearly somewhere? Is there a single stat that is better than a decade ago? Net income wise, since 2008 it looks like roughly 8B in losses. Add up all 15yrs, I can't bother, a quick look shows 2x 3.3B losses, a 1.2B loss, many ~500mil losses that eat any 500mil gain year. Again, making 660mil TTM (trailing twelve months) is worth more today why? When will they make 6B NET INCOME? 10x 2009 income, would be 10x 2009 share price (discount 2x dilution etc...ROFL), so maybe $80 if you magically were making 6B today and magically bought back 1/2 your shares by 4pm today ;) I could keep going...Sell AMD lunatics. Buy INTC making 2.5x 2016 NET income (11B vs. 23.6B today) when shares were 38. Stock should be above $80 as shares have been bought back every quarter since 2008 (only one Q in 12yrs went up). 2008 shares outstanding were 5.7B, today 4.2B. Thus easy to see $38 x 2.x + buybacks = probably closer to $100. If Intel posts a 24B+ year next year explain to me why it isn't above $70 from Jan2020? This Q dampened by corona etc, but we're coming back and their income isn't ~12-15B all of the sudden is it? NOPE.
Stock is a bargain at $52 still making 23B and still saying full year great (despite Q3 not too good I think). They took a massive haircut on fake fab news that is really over at this point knowing Intel is holding TSMC chips in hand, not even mentioning Intel about a year ahead on 3 types of packaging tech that could change things quickly anyway. It is a pity AMD took 3yrs to charge more. Intel would have gladly never reduced prices. That said, wait for the Q report, any bad news will end with it IMHO and you may get a decent discount before exploding next year as Intel won't be losing net income for 2021 so stock goes above 70 previous high by next xmas, and Q1 2022 probably hitting $100 at some point (sooner if Net income hits 25B+?). We're not talking AMD here, this is real INCOME. For any PRICE whiners on cpu or gpu: Just buy 3-5K Intel in the next month and laugh next year with FREE xmas PC. Smart people got it at $43 on fake fab news like Intel was out of business or something. Start making NET INCOME LISA SU or give back some of that 59mil salary. Your console love is killing AMD every freaking year it exists.
I was waiting for this inevitable post from TheJian. It's especially ironic on an article where a bunch of the comments are complaints that AMD have... *drumroll* raised their prices.
Some people can use a whole lot of words to say very, very little.
i read his posts as blah blah blah blah.. rant rant rant rant.. and riddled with pro intel garbage to prove how much he loves intel. completely inconsequential.
I hope you don't own AMD, about to pay for another ATI...LOL. Not pro Intel, pro making money on the stock until I can't then hate it ;) Just like AMD now, Nvidia now...Owned both just before Intel...So...I care about making money on my money so chip prices mean NOTHING to me, and I don't have to whine like the rest of you about $50-100...LOL. OMG they raised prices so they maybe can make some net income to support that $80+ share price even thought they make income today for a YEAR that is less than a SINGLE quarter from 2009 with double shares outstanding etc etc etc...Jeez the case is awful here. I see no data from anyone debating me. Thanks, I'll check again tomorrow. Nobody downing data yet, thanks that's the point of the posts :)
Clearly, yes, for you best to ignore. You don't own stock, or CEO pay would bug you at this level for this income vs the rest of the list of S&P top ten CEO's. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/hi... Look at the NET INCOME of all the other companies on the list BELOW her...LOL. IF you don't get the point...Best to ignore you always. You will cost people money on stocks :( https://islamreigns.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pa... No debate from you either...You can't debate my points I guess, thanks, I post just to see if anyone can down the data. You made it to maybe 2 or 3? Rant sounds like tone, I'll give you lvl2-3 but it's weak at best as you didn't even make a point. Best to ignore people who ignore data. Was my CEO pay comment out of line, or accurate? Everyone on the list is killing AMD's income. The guy in the 10th spot made 1.7B for his millions (far below hers at only 30mil). Make a billion already AMD at least for the year! This isn't 2009!
Debate the data or STFU? ;) What is the point of your post exactly? CPU share 20% but income isn't going up a buck vs. previous years. Hmmm...Yeah, she's worth it. EEtimes gave her Executive of the year for 2014, she was hired Oct 2014 (hired at AMD 2012). It's like an obama Pulitzer for something he can't even name, while donald has 3 votes for REAL PEACE progress deals. It would appear she was handed designs we've seen today (takes 5yrs to make a cpu), and can't make much money on it even with winners. Most of the map we've seen since she arrived was DONE or in tapeout etc and she hasn't done much with it yet. Keller's pipeline is probably about exhausted. But that doesn't mean they can't make more, iterate on it, etc...I'm just saying...
LISA SU pushed the console crap. Look it up. She is directly responsible for wasting R&D on single to mid teen digit margins on those wasted wafers. Keller etc started ZEN 2012 (launch Q2 2017 -4.5-5yrs), while Lisa pushed diversification from 90% cpu/gpu to 60% from Oct 2014 on, and the rest is peanut junk and wasted wafers on consoles.
You should not be proud of shifting from high margin cpu/gpu to 40% products from mid teens or lower margins (AMD said single digits to mid teens, never more yet AFAIK). This is the EXACT opposite of what Intel did when short wafers (move production to server/hedt for MARGIN!). That is a FAIL and why they are not making BILLIONS per year now at 20% share. You have the WRONG 20% share, if you're making 660mil while the other guy makes 23.6B TTM on 80%. Quick math shows it should be 5-6B for AMD INCOME. You are too lazy or dumb debate me. My attacks on Lisa Su are warranted based on DATA right in front of your face. You DOUBLED your share of the cpu market from 11% 2017 (zen launch) to 20% today, but you can't hit 1B NET INCOME from Dec2009 Q? Keller etc's work is being wasted and I'm thinking his designs will be about out shortly and we'll see what comes after from Su's leadership now design wise (more console crap surely).
Dirk Meyer would be making 5B+ yearly right now on these cpus and NEVER would have OK'd console R&D until CPU/GPU income allowed it. Dirk said make kings not crap 2011 before being fired for it! Su has no idea how to deal with kings it seems. PRICE like a king if you have one. PERIOD. She's winning awards for diversity (SJW crap) instead of net income. Her income vs. AMD's makes sense now. :)
Oct 2014 she made CEO & lost 350mil. So far all Q's since she's been CEO, -376mil net income if you add up every Q that she's been CEO for. Now add up her income for 5yrs. Still don't see the point? https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/... You can add right? That sheet and just about every other data point you can click on that site should make shareholders shake in their boots. Never mind the data you can mine on a paid stock site. Bring back the DARK MAYOR, he gets it.
Anyone thinking I hate AMD is an idiot and probably doesn't even know what I just said (Dark Mayor who?). I was an AMD re-seller for ~9yrs fighting Intel in the 90's/20's (not in Intel program)...LOL. I made tons of posts attacking intel at toms/anandtech etc over bapco crap (they owned their land, registered their domain etc..ROFL), downing Van Smith over exposing tomshwardware (they removed his name from his articles too!) etc. Not a fan of any company, especially Intel. That said, I'll take the money they'll make me in the next 18mo and fully appreciate management and how they've lost share, set revenue/income records, while losing fab race for years, short wafers, 10% market not even served, etc. That is GREAT management correct (moving to TSMC good move for a time too)? They are in a perfect storm, but managing silicon super smart to make INCOME still as if it wasn't happening. Results don't lie, people like you do. Ignore me if you hate your wallet :)
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/... Share outstanding for Lisa SU entering CEO 750mil. TODAY 1.22B. In case you missed it, that is like taking your $100 bill in your pocket, and now it's only worth ~$60 or so. Are you taking this in? I'm trying to give you ignorant instead of stupid, but I'm leaning towards stupid with you after realizing all the data points I've given even before this post that you ignored already.
All the whiners about price should ignore this guy and start listening to people like me trying to explain how you can make money ON your money so you can work less and whine less. :) Hate every company; Love stocks that make money for you (and only for that long...ROFL). AMD is 100% hype at this income. I'm not in Vegas (well my VPN says I am now..ROFL, wait, no NY today - netherlands later...LOL), I like safe investing and no losses.
Buying AMD today at this income, shares, etc, is like betting in vegas where the house knows ALL cards and you're drunk. I fully explained why this is not good to buy, but you love the company (why? Work there?), so can't swallow facts/data.
More data for you guys, so attack my data people, if you can. Nobody can read everything, so these posts are to see if anyone can poke holes in data. I'm searching for a way to buy AMD at some point, but just can't see it until a crash or Billion+ NET INCOME Q's. Oh and I prefer at least 4 in a row to prove direction at this point AMD (a year!). I think servers will make it worth $80 at some point maybe (5nm/3nm?), but they are priced as if making 5B heading to 6+ NOW rather than 2-3yrs away. I can't risk that much VEGAS (owned AMD not long ago BTW).
FWIW my mom made $900 in a day on AMD a week or two ago...ROFL. WE don't hate them, but I scolded her and so did my dad. He likes data, but my mom's excuse for buying AMD? It was going up today...WTH? I almost blocked her PC at the router. My dad freaked (two retirees). I told her if she ever does that again without proof of WHY, I'll destroy her PC and shut her down for life. That inheritance is mine and she's gambling with it (lost 2K on apple the next week...WTH are you doing? Same reason). In that debate, she couldn't see 900-2000 is a loss, not a win for the week and I hate day traders! Anandtech forcing me to cut post...LOL.
I just want to block you so I don’t have to see the long unnecessary posts. I hope the comments section is updated here. Also, not interested in attack or debates. Here for discussion but not with someone like you. Didn’t even have to read your post to respond 😂
You're too clever for me, sir, who am but a simple person and can't understand all this talk of stocks and money; yet, as I read your posts, only one thought strikes me again and again, the words of old Polonius, "That brevity is the soul of wit / Tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes."
You are attacking me for telling AMD to make more money? How is that Anti AMD? Wake me when you learn to debate. Can't argue with the data huh? I want to own AMD stock again, but there is no reason to. I love no company, only the money I can make on them. I'll sell Intel as soon as I have no faith in the stock price again (yeah, again, owned them all, NV/AMD/INTC/MSFT etc over and over).
AMD produces no net income for decades, and you still don't get it. You completely ignored the data. Check the links..drumroll - I win.
Some people make statements that say NOTHING. :) Why type? My post was to save AMD stockholders from getting burned AGAIN. It isn't worth $10. See the data. How many numbers were there in my post that said "very little"? ROFLMAO. I can only conclude you are an idiot if you can't see data in my post...LOL. All it is, is DATA point after point, easily verifiable.
Can you attack the data at all? You have nothing :) It's hard to argue with sound logic, so all you have is name calling, tone, BS comments. Ok, who's that helping? I take it you can't afford your gpu or cpu...ROFL. AMD bought all mine for years to come. Yeah, I hate AMD...ROFL. BTW, NV bought even more, just saying. Intel about to buy tons more future chips/pc's etc.
All you got out of that post was prices? IF you buy Intel today, your next gpu/cpu price doesn't matter next xmas 2021. Stay ignorant/broke. You have that right ;)
For the upcoming article, I'd like to have benchmarks for the 3000 series to compare to. Specifically because the 5800X looks close in price to current 3900(X) pricing. Most games are GPU limited, so multi-threaded software benchmarks like Handbrake, etc. are of particular interest to me for overall desktop usage.
Part of the problem is they might have just caught up in gaming, but they are quite ahead outside of gaming. Expect 20-30 percent. Prices are a real bummer though.
Is it a typo or is it intended? The article says this :"The Ryzen 7 5800X is expected to follow in the footsteps of the popular Ryzen 7 3700X" But i am guessing the author meant to say 3800X given the pricing and TDP. 3800X was a 105W processor with $400 MSRP at launch. 3700X was $329 and 65W TDP.
There were rumors that AMD is constrained by supply from TSMC a few months ago. I suspect that might be the reason for the price hike. The new CPUs are going to sell out anyway, and AMD doesn't want to leave money on the table.
Intel makes hundreds of billions in revenue yearly...which equates to, with their pricing...around 60 billion a year in profits.
Amd makes around 28 billion in revenue...and at the end of the day...around 98 million dollars.
What do you think pays for research and development?
Intel is NOT caught between anything except a release of a product that is barely keeping up with and slightly exceeding their processors from LAST YEAR.
Atleast AMD has figured it out and decided to increase their pricing so they can avoid going bankrupt which they've been on the verge of by pricing things at fanboy levels.
Learn how to business and then start making comments...beyond that. Intel is on top for a reason. Market share does NOT matter when you are NOT making any profit.
Gosh, Mucko, you've really put things into perspective here. But help me out: with all these billions of dollars in profit, why do you think that Intel chips have been increasingly uncompetitive over the past few years? Some would say that throwing money at a hard problem doesn't always make it go away, but those people are probably just communists (or engineers). I'm sure you have your own opinion about it — after all, you have opinions about so many things! — so please do share your enlightenment with us.
Also, having looked at AMD's figures, it sure doesn't look like they're going bankrupt. Some (such as those who can add and subtract correctly) would even say that they're making a profit. But maybe you're on to something. Why don't you go off and write an article about how AMD is on the verge of bankruptcy?
Have you considered applying to be CFO at AMD, Mucko? I'm sure that, after years of increasing profit and market share — which, as you know, inevitably leads to bankruptcy — they'd love to benefit from your wisdom. Send your resume in. Let us know what they say.
Please compare Total War turn-times in later rounds with lots of DLC factions installed, it's not always about moar fps with gaming. Turn-times can literally takes several minutes with the user twiddling thumbs while the CPU does its thing.
Also compare times for flipping through many images (JPEG, TIFF) and through image heavy PDF files. These things are still single-threaded and I eagerly await an image format that finally allows multi-threading to be used for decoding single image files (or software that reads multiple files via multiple threads).
You ask for review interests, here are mine, perhaps somewhat specific:
While I do use my systems for gaming, too, they pay for themselves via work. And there I have some specific interests, which you might want to shed a light on.
1. Power management. This is often a power/noise tradeoff and even if not, because the consumption/performance curves are exponential, the ability to cap (or not) power consumption, preferably via APIs command line tools on Windows and Linux at run-time, would be ideal. I'd love to be able to tell the 16-core: Please make do with 10/20/40/80 Watts so fans don't rev beyond audible and let it rip right there, boosting to 5GHz or whatnot on a single core or 2 GHz on 16 cores as I juggle real-time vs batchy loads. Having to twiddle with such settings in the BIOS is a real drag and the point of having a high-core CPU is that you do several rather different tasks on such a system
2. ECC, RAS, encrypted RAM etc. I just love virtualizing entire clusters of systems on my big machines. Putting 16 cores and 128GB of RAM and terabytes of NVMe storage into a system no longer requires selling your house: Cancelling Christmas for the kids to make daddy happy might just do it nowadays. And to make that worth while, I'd pay a little extra to have a system that will run reliably for days to months, meaning ECC memory among other things. And one set of features I'd really like to have even on 'consumer desktops' is the ability to run VMs in a very trusted environment, specifically with memory encryption for the virtual guest and ideally with control flow integrity extensions active.
Encrypted VMs (Intel calls that multi-key total memory encryption or MKTME): With AMD this is currently an Epyc feature and labelled SEV. Intel hasn't explicitly limited that to server SKUs. It really is something I'd love to see on anything starting with laptops, because it would allow running highly secure corporate enclave VMs on bring-your-own or stay-at-home desktops.
Control flow integrity via shadow-stacks and other things are clearly a defensive mechanism I'd want in my armory, perhaps a little less when I am aiming for FPS in gaming, but very much whilst I am doing my banking and tax returns online. I'd love to know what AMD stands on CFI!
In short: The bigger a system, the less likely it is single purpose. It's ability to adapt to different use-cases, energy, noise, reliability and security constraints *while operating* becomes a decive quality. I'd want that system to go full throttle while gaming, while going practically silent sipping miniscule energy and putting 95% of its resources to sleep while running the home through the night, casually fighting off all those malware nasties perpetually after everything you value.
Holy Cow 16 cores better than 3950x under $1k, I am going to buy one soon. Intel just don't have this kind of cores competition / $ any more. This is the day I'll stop buying any Intel cpu unless they doing something better and cheaper. lol. fat chances.
Intel is at 4 core Tiger Lake right now. Maybe we'll get 8 core 14nm Tiger Lake light in 2021. Where are the 16 cores? Nowhere. Intel is crushed honestly in the high end desktop right now.
I'm a little disappointed with the pricing, but not surprised. The problem will be bigger in my region which has the 3900x at just under $600 and the 3700x at over $400. Looks like if I upgrade I'll just order from American amazon and have it shipped to save money, or just look for a used 3950x to replace my 2700x.
It's a bit odd their IPC example used the 12 core chips (with 6 cores per chip in the 5000) for an 8 core comparison.
Why not the 8 core chips? Or do a 12 core comparison?
It kind of seems like AMD have done an Intel. "Whoops, competition is low, so we'll just update performance incrementally, save on coolers while also bumping the price"
Prices: After Intel knocked AMD to the ropes they charged a huge tax to consumers, made a pile of cash, distributed fair dividends and still saved a lot for R&D. It's almost a miracle what Lina Su achieved. To keep leadership over Intel, distribute fair dividends to investors and generate cash flow for R&D, that ultimately will benefit consumers and the industry, AMD cannot be the like of Mother Teresa of Calcutta.
- Intel charged a huge tax to consumers, made a pile of cash, distributed fair dividends, saved a lot for R&D ... and is still falling behind on the CPU side.
- AMD is like "Mother Teresa of Calcutta" ... and has been at the cutting-edge of x86 CPUs for the past few years.
So to "keep leadership over Intel", AMD should ... emulate the company which is losing market share? I'm struggling to see your logic here. Based on the track record of the past few years, it seems that Lisa Su has better ideas than you do, and you should probably leave the planning to her.
19 percent over A13 which beats zen 2 by 5% integer and lags behind by 5%in FP perf. The mobile A14 is a 19 % increase in ST perf. That means technically a higher clocked laptop A14 should match zen 3 at half the power?
Fair, but I was still responding to this claim: "Heard some geek bench leaks pointing to a 19% increase for apple"
I'm not sure these are direct competitors anyway - not many people will happily flip between MacOS and Windows. Perhaps if they sort out Boot Camp - and MS sort out x64 emulation on ARM - it might be more of a direct comparison,
Even if it is better performance per watt on Apple's side (and hats off to them for the excellent work), the thing is, Core and Ryzen have got all the overhead of x86 decoding, which takes a lot of power, and is a sort of handicap, as far as I'm aware. Personally, I think that if AMD and Intel were to design their main CPUs as ARM ones, they'd likely beat Apple's A CPUs. Just my opinion though, and I'm not trying to propose that ARM takes over.
Your last sentence is asking for what comparisons matter most?
I would like to see the top two benched against the equivalent prior gen. I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering if I should grab a 39xx or a 59xx to upgrade from my 2700x.
I'd also like to see "officially supported" AIO and air coolers benched on the top two, looking at cooling capacity as well as quietness. I have a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 Dual Tower now which keeps my 2700x pretty cool, even when the ambient temp in my office is > 90 degrees F. (Southern AZ no AC...) But the noise gets to be an issue.
What's the story with APUs in these things? My understanding was that the zen 3s would have APUs that will power the B550 mobo's HDMI ports etc, because the zen2s cannot do it... but I don't see any mention of this anywhere. Do these parts have compatible APUs with the B550 boards?
Thanks. Very weird to me that all the non-OEM mobos being sold with DP + HDMI, for more than a year if Q3 2021 launch per your forecast, are completely useless (DP + HDMI I mean).
They also can't go into B550 boards. I know this because I was hoping to build a system with a 3200G and B550 and then update later, and was very disappointed to find out I couldn't.
I'm honestly not sure - I thought they'd fixed that issue.
If I'm being cynical, it's probably to save time and money on validation whilst reaping the benefits of forcing some people to upgrade and/or spend more money than they'd ideally like to.
The move from 4 core dies to 8 core dies drops their yield right back down again (though probably not introductory Ryzen 3000 levels). Of course it's $50 more! That unified cache cost is extremely far from free.
It's irrelevant for perfect chips. For usable yields it's about how many parts can be isolated and disabled. If you have a 2x4 CCX you'll get both 2x4 and 1x4 usable chips. Make 1x8 CCX and it either works or you throw it away. Even if the 1x4 chips sell for much less, losing them means you have to charge more for the full chips.
P.S. $750 -> $800 = 6.7% for the 5950X over the 3950X is a no-brainer. It's just in the value market that AMD has decided they don't need to play the underdog anymore. And they can always drop the price if they feel like it, it's much harder to start at $250 and realize it should have been $300 than the other way around.
"Make 1x8 CCX and it either works or you throw it away" - not really, they're still selling chips using 6 cores of the CCD. Unless you're specifically referring to problems with the cache?
Ya, that's the thing here. 5600X is competing in price vs 10700 (non K), and the 5800X is price competitive vs 10900K. That means AMD is running a 6c/12t chip vs Intel 8c/16t and an 8c/16t vs Intel 10c/20t in terms of price. That comparison may not work out quite the way they planned.
How? You can straightforwardly get better performance at similar perf/$ with a 5000 series, or better perf/$ and similar performance with a 3000 series.
The smart money is on buying a 500 motherboard and a 3600, then updating later to a 5000 series chip when the prices drop.
The smart money depends a lot on what you currently have.
In my case, that's a 2700X on a B450.
So the smart money for me is wait for clearance sales on 3900s or maybe a 3950, and then have a cheaper path for a 5900 or 5950 later when the next gen comes out. (Presumably the BIOS kinks for 5000s on the B450 will resolved ... and I skip the 550 boards altogether.)
I got the Ryzen 7 2700X for $150 with free games almost a year ago. The pricing on these will need to be fixed if they want to crush Intel. Let's see what happens post release. Professionals won't care about pricing though so that's fine but not sure how much volume there.
finally and probably more impressive once we have seen the numbers. This will also improve fps numbers for the RTX 3080 on 1440p and lower resolutions. now that AMD is on top and so is the premium pricing. The 5600x is out of my budget for occasional loads and gaming use unlike the 3600 where I can still stretch it.
It might not, because the inability for Ampere to fully utilise its resources are lower resolutions has more to do with the way the architecture is designed than the CPU.
Yup - "second-half of 2021" is the current estimated release date. Going on their current record, that probably means September at the earliest, but if they really have sorted their 10nm issues then it might be earlier.
Really looking forward to a "good and proper" Intel 10nm CPU going against AMD on a similar node. But Q4 next year means AMD will certainly be on enhanced 7nm or even 5nm for some products and not sure which version of Intel's 10nm. Should be interesting though, if SPR and its derivatives are as good.
Me too! As someone who's always been fascinated by Intel's process node developments, the delays to 10nm and accompanying product screw-ups have been a long-running disappointment. They might just-about catch AMD before their transition to 5nm, and they may even be on 10nm "Enhanced SuperFin" by the time they do. It'll make for an interesting comparison.
4.9 GHz nice! But I don't get it. Why is it called 59 50X, it should have been called 59 49X :) When 5.0 GHz part comes out, it should be called 59 50X :)
First off that had a single core boost of 4.3ghz, and i would be willing to bet the IPC on the new ryzen 5000's is probably 40% higher than that CPU. I'm not sure what you're trying to say/complain about?
Yeah Zen 3 probably has 25% IPC advantage at least and 10% higher frequency plus much better efficiency. The 5800X is in another league. Even the 9900k will be no match for AMDs latest Ryzen processors.
I don't understand, how is AMD able to reduce latency for Ryzen 5900X if its still the same chiplet design. Has IPC improvement alone has helped in increased gaming performance.
Instead of 2 chiplets with 2x CCX each, these parts now have 2 chiplets with 1x "CCX". Access to cache and other cores is now better => latency is lower. Obvious cost of this improvement is increased complexity of CCX - easier to have 4 fully linked cores than to have 8 cores with whatever design (it almost surely isn't fully linked, too many connections).
Review interests: overall system latency, and specifically VR motion-photons latency and latency consistency. Without a new chipset series I'm not expecting this to have much improvement over the 3xxx series chips, but hopefully the less-heterogenous layout may help. With any luck a future 600-series chipset might finally ditch the thrice-be-damned Asmedia USB root hub for something less awful.
I wonder what the 8 core CCX will mean for Zen 3 APUs. Typically the Ruben APUs have used a single CCX meaning 4 cores. Should we expect Zen 3 APUs to be 8 core?
As I recall, Henry Ford hated banks (he even took ford private), & when the very long running model T inarguably needed replacing along w/ his factory, his finance plan was simple. Raise prices until it was paid for, then reduce them again.
There may be an element of that in amd's strategy? Borrowings are more dangerous than most realise. U can be 100% right, but just wrong timing can screw you.
If the price of an AMD 12 core chip is slightly higher than the price of an Intel 10 core chip... then AMD chips are still cheaper. But dropping the stock cooler on the 8-core and 12-core parts says to me those chips are running hotter than they're letting on.
5600X vs. 3600 and 3600X are the comparisons I'm most interested in - bsides that, seeing how much they've raised the bar at the top-end would also be lovely.
Definitely need to see how the core-for-core comparisons look between these chips and Comet Lake.
It's not apparent that Ian watched the presentation--I think he needs to go back and watch Papermaster's segment again...;) What does this mean:
"With a base frequency of 3.7 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.8 GHz, AMD is calling this processor the ‘World’s Best Gaming CPU’. This is likely because of the lower core count than the other Ryzen 9 allowing slightly higher frequencies when a game loads up several of the cores – the six cores per chiplet lowers the thermal density when running, enabling higher frequencies."
Base frequency of the 3900X 12ct/12t is 3.8GHz...so does this mean AMD is dropping it by 1GHz, or is this a misprint? Secondly--"the other R9"--12c/24t 3900X has four CCX's, with each CCD containing containing two CCXs. Please explain "lower core count"--lower than what?...;) "The other R9" is not informative.
Also, Papermaster explained that the entire architecture has been reworked and latencies have been improved. Try looking at his section again.
Edit above...actually, the 5900X's 3.7GHz base clock will run faster than the 3.8GHz 3900X because of the ~20% increase in IPC--while running cooler because of consuming less power, possibly.
Still waiting to hear about the "other R9"--which other R9? there is more than one...;)
Personally. I'm interested in VR performance. Most of the VR flight sims are single thread DX11 titles that only seem to run well on Intel chips, with big deficits on even the fastest Zen 2 chips.
And it seems to be something inherent to flight sims, since pretty much all of them run slower on Ryzen, even when they are completely unrelated engines written by completely unrelated companies.
Intel’s next gen chips will have PCIe-4, what would you say then? Intel also has K series processors without integrated graphics. Many might be idiots but be informed yourself before calling names.
As a gamer, is the 5600x enough? I plan to use it with VR for Star Wars Squadrons and probably other VR games. My current Intel Quadcore CPU is very old, but still going strong. I can play Overwatch with it on my 4K TV at 60 FPS no problem with my GTX 1070. According to the minimum CPU specs for Squadrons, my CPU is too slow. I haven't bought the game yet and tried it. The 5600x seems like a good deal because it has lower power requirements, comes with a cooler, and is significantly cheaper, yet the clock speed and cache are right up there with the others, just less cores. If I plan to keep this for 10 years, would I regret going with the 5600x? I don't play a lot of different games, but when something like Squadrons comes along, I want to be able to play it.
If you where planning to upgrade every couple years then I would say just buy what you need for now, things will change, but the software is trailing behind right now. You are looking to keep the same system for ten years, so buy the best you can afford - hardware and software will of advanced a fair amount by that time. And a game you didn't even know that you would want to play finial materialized - the game is only in a designer's dreams right now.
Thanks everyone. It sounds like today the 5600x is good enough for just about anything from a gaming perspective, and if this changes down the road, I can just drop in a new CPU at that time if I feel I need to. I may decide to go with the 5800x after seeing the reviews though. It is a lot more money though for maybe no real benefit to me since I don't play a lot of games. I do plan on doing a lot of VR and having more cores may help with that to keep the frame rates up and latency down.
Consoles have had 8 core cpus for 7 years now, and we still have yet to see a PC game that *really* benefits from more than 4 cores/8 threads (all else being equal).
XB1 and PS4 had 8 weak Jaguar cores. Only 1 thread per core, and only about 6-7 cores were available for game developers to use (1-2 cores were reserved for the OS). The result is something easy to match with a quad-core.
XSX and PS5 have 8 Zen 2 cores, with much better IPC, clock speeds, AVX performance, etc. Also 2 threads per core, although I'm not sure how many cores/threads are available.
So you will see more games using 8 cores to their full potential starting around 2022. I hope that some future games will be able to utilize 12, 16, 24, 32, 64, etc. cores given that there will be more parallelization to begin with, but we can't count on that.
Naming products according to superstition makes as much sense as saying all of this instead of 'cause duopoly':
"AMD believes that the increased raw performance of its product demands pricing more consummate with its position in the market, and so we see a slight MSRP increase from $399 to $449."
That was never going to happen. I'm hoping to see more memory channels with Zen 4, except that DDR5 has a "two channels per module" design so we could see systems with 4 DIMMs but marketed as having 8 memory channels.
"That was never going to happen." No kidding. Companies try to give people as little performance as they can. Their goal is to maximize margin. Sell less for more.
"I'm hoping to see more memory channels with Zen 4, except that DDR5 has"
Of course DDR5 is going to be a carrot on a stick to tell people to upgrade.
this is very dum idea. its tanks should be able to fly for short distances. not only that motherboard you speak of exists and its called threadripper. quad channel memory would hurt latency, and require a new socket, just one year before ddr5 goes mainstream. how do u put quad channel memory in micro atx and mini itx, or should those users pay for sillicon that they cant use ???
"quad channel memory would hurt latency" So? Having 4 RAM sticks in T topology might hurt latency some but that doesn't mean everyone sticks with 2 sticks and daisy chain.
"how do u put quad channel memory in micro atx and mini itx"
Who cares?
"or should those users pay for sillicon that they can't use"
Yes, obviously, but *to what benefit*? The vast majority of use cases for these chips would see little to no benefit from the increased bandwidth.
Meanwhile they'd need a new socket to account for the extra pins needed for quad-channel memory, which would increase costs - more development and validation needed, higher cost of of boards for the extra traces needed, etc. All for a few percent in performance at most on the majority of apps.
There's a reason they have Threadripper and Epyc for use cases that genuinely need more bandwidth.
Threadripper doesn’t have quad channel RAM. Zen 3 could have implemented quad channel RAM with Threadripper. The complaint about a new socket is weak because AMD already obsoleted the 1st gen TR boards.
As for “what end?”, an article here already answered that and said testing data will be forethcoming.
DDR4 is old and AMD could have made Zen3’s inability to support both DDR4 and DDR5 less of a drawback by giving the chip the ability to support quad channel RAM. Perhaps there will be a third TR refresh that will do that.
"Threadripper doesn't have quad channel RAM". Uhhh, yes it does. All Threadrippers ever made have at least four memory channels. Threadripper Pro which is OEM only has eight memory channels like Epyc.
"Threadripper doesn’t have quad channel RAM" Wrong.
Zen 3 Threadripper hasn't been announced yet, but you can guarantee when it does it will use Quad Channel because, once again, Zen 2 Threadripper already does.
My "complaint" (not a complaint) about a new socket isn't "weak" because it has nothing to do with Threadripper. We were talking about mainstream desktop until you decided to start moving the goalposts around. 🙄
Looks like the 5000 series has a price increase of 6.7% to 20% compared to their 3000 series counterparts, for a 19% performance increase in the IPC. So for the 5950 the 6.7% increase in price makes the 19% performance increase a better value than the 20% price increase for the 5600.
It stands to reason given AMD's situation. Everything they make gets sold and it's hard to get a hold of many of their products. They are production capacity constrained and are launching the best ever processors to whom and at what price should that production capacity go?
This article seems more like a PR note on AMD’s behalf rather than a normal launch (make that announcement) one. Sad part is, those frequencies that AMD claims will (barely) be obtainable on one core and one core only (especially if the recent events, as shown by Tom’s, are to be taken into account) while Intel’s offerings can actually go on 5ghz on all cores (even more, on their higher end offerings, when proper cooling is present). So this means that any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel. I’m mighty curious about the 1080p gaming tests. Those are most relevant when it comes to CPUs.
liquid_c , sad part is, no one knows that for sure, unless i missed something and you can provide a link, i dont recall any one talking about overclocking, or how high each core gets to, or max all core. "So this means that any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel. " we will find out for sure on nov 5th TBH, who cares about 5ghz, its just a number, and only intel needs to go that high.
Launches are PR announcements. Or did you forget that Intel just launched Tiger Lake with no products and a PR platform sent to reviewers that, it turns out, really doesn't represent performance in shipping products?
You also failed to demonstrate how you suppose that "any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel" but that's okay, we can safely presume you pulled that out of your ass.
Well for Tiger Lake, what you're saying is false. One google and you'll find plenty of reviews of a pre-prod laptop that was provided within a week or so of launch, speculated at the time to be an MSI laptop. In the past couple of weeks there are a number of reviews of shipping product showing up in multiple places.
@shady28: Did you read my post before replying? I referred to that pre-prod laptop specifically. NotebookCheck have now reviewed / previewed three Tiger Lake devices in addition to that preview model, and none of them (not one) can manage the same level of sustained 28W performance as the demo unit. One of them (Asus Zenbook Flip S) substantially under-performs its 15W performance too:
The very article you link to, has a chart with the pre-prod laptop in it, and 4 shipping production laptops. The pre-prod at 15W beats one of them (which the author put in 3 different modes) and the other 3 beat the pre-prod at 15W. None of the shipping laptops were setup for 28W, so none of them beat the reference. The reference by the way is something the author chose not to test in its production form - I believe it was an MSI Stealth 15M which you can order now.
There is nothing new here, just an ignorant tech writer unaware of variable TDPs. For years now laptops have shipped with varying ability to burst higher TDP than rated. We have 10750H 35-45W laptops running 65W, same thing with Ryzen 7 4800H which has been known to hit 90W on wall power.
Did anyone noticed the strange pricing on the new CPUs? Going 8 cores, 33% over 6 cores is 50% more expensive, going 12 cores 50% over 8 is 22% more? WTH?
Yeah, people noticed. Just divide the $ amount by the core count. $50 per core (6), $56.25 (8), $45.83 (12), $50 (16).
The 8-core is unusually expensive, the 12-core is a "good deal". If you were forced to buy a Zen 3 CPU right now at launch price, you should pick the 6-core or go straight to the 12-core. 16-core only if you need that. But AMD could release a 5700X and other models later.
Evidently AMD is having a tough time getting full 8-core dies. The six and twelve core CPUs both use harvested 6-core dies. Maybe yields aren't great or AMD is hoarding the full dies for server products.
Before anyone goes touting how wonderful these new processors are, please go look at their underlying chipset's PCI/e specs... (1 x16 or 2 x8s, i x4 for m.2 NVME slot - all the rest of the usable lanes (16) go to SATA and USB, and are controlled via an x4 interlink.)
The chipset choking is cutting off my air supply....
Like the TYR suit, the streamlined design of this Nike cutout style allows serious swimmers to focus on their stroke — not their knee length swimsuit. “It is not only comfortable but very durable,” says Julie Stupp, a 2012 Olympic trials finalist swimmer and in-house product reviewer for SwimOutlet. “The Nike Cut-Out also has thin straps that don’t dig into your shoulders and back. These suits will last through hours and hours of training.” Novaswimwear is the no #1 in the swimwear products. They are kept in mind their customer need and budget. A swimsuit can be worn as an undergarment in sports that require a wetsuit such as water skiing, scuba diving, surfing, and wakeboarding. There is a very wide range of styles of modern swimsuits available, which vary as to body coverage and materials. The choice of style depend on people to chose swimwear that are fit on them. At Nova Swimwear, we stock a great selection of affordable knee length swimsuit designs for women at prices that won't break the bank. Our range includes designs to suit even the most demanding swimmer, including many varied prints in solid and fluo colors. From sleek, sleek swimsuits to bold and colorful, each and every one of our products is made with chlorine resistant fabric for long-lasting quality and comfort.
Find a training swimwear to aid you in swimming training. Does it fit your body and feel lighter? So you don't need to look anywhere else. Try the one-piece spliced style because it's the best option, girls racing swimwear should be picked very carefully it has features like elastic cross and elastic edging. Give the detail across the bust. Show off your waist for a fantastic look. Electric mesh in the front and back helps provide support for tummy control. It will give you a vain step by the pool, which is beautiful and courageous. Different sizes are available. These best fits cup sizes A to D. They are available in a variety of prints. Sometimes it comes with a ruffle design at the neckline. It should be the one that's on. Buy sports swimwear for women. Thousands of chlorine resistant swimsuits for your fitness sessions or swimming training. Our range of women's training and competition swimsuits are built to last. At Nova Swimwear, we have a huge selection of affordable girls racing swimwear designs at prices that won't break you a fortune. Our range includes models to satisfy even the most demanding swimmer, including many varied prints in solid and fluorescent colors. From sleek, sleek swimsuits to bold and colorful, each and every one of our products is made with chlorine resistant fabric for long-lasting quality and comfort.
Novaswimwear is a swimwear brand. We make quality to enhance the look of your body. Each piece is personalized and sculpted with lots of support for the bust. Ensures good looking fabrications and contour power mesh. It is designed to shape your body. It is designed to look flatter. The full range of Nova swimwear sale that has been standard in the "true to size" summer sales for curvy women and fashion models. We have sizes from 14 to 24. You may estimate that you will need a size small or a normal size. The Novaswimwear brand will look trendy and adorable on your curvy body. Discover the sale of women's swimwear and beachwear at Novaswimwear. Shop the latest collection of women's swimwear and beachwear on sale. Find great deals on swimwear in our exclusive women's sale range. Shop for everything from swimsuits, bikinis, and tankinis to beach cover-ups. Every franchise loves the sports illustrated swimsuit edition. Swimsuit has always been a highly anticipated edition of the Sports Illustrated franchise. Sports swimwear sale is trendy nowadays especially in females. We have a large range of sporty swimsuits. Our collection includes One-piece and knee-length. It entirely fits the body with a sporty feel. Make a splash and get moving in our bold range of sports swimwear. Shop from a wide collection of swimwear for ladies at Novaswimwear. Choose from a wide range of bikini sets, board shorts and more by leading brands.
nothing has happend. if you have been reading, it has been stated by AT that the vid card reviews have been delayed due to the on going wild fires in california, which is where the gpu reviewer, lives.
NVidia is a great company, not up to AMD standards, but amazing. If they choose to not send their cards, it is out of fear for Big Navi. Nvidia bought 3Dfx while AMD bought the much better ATI company. If you were making a card that was about to become yesterday's news when AMD comes to town with the Big Navi, would you want people reviewing it or would you hide under your sheets?
yea ok sure. i dont understand why most are crying over amd raising their prices. if the performace is there over prev gen, and intel, ( which we will know for sure Nov 5th ) then it is justified. after all., didnt intel raise its prices over the years when intel had the performance advantage ??? come on. do people really expect amd to keep their prices below intel even if they have the lead across the board ????????????
Guys, all the tests like Cine and actual games, I guess, are based on average performance, right? Is there a good measure of whether a CPU gets bogged down at one point or another that doesn't get captured by the average (numbers crunched / time spent). When doing heavy loads, like those few seconds where a ton of trolls run around at the same time, that's where I want performance. I don't care much about performance in 95% of the time. Any tests you know about that can inform me here?
A housewife as a call girl is a forbidden fruit which everyman on this earth would like to eat. There is something about the way housewives exude their sexiness that anybody could fall for them irrespective of age or genre. The housewife escort Mumbai comes from this breed and you could expect it to be a choice encounter that you will remember for life. Though it cannot be said the same about a College call girl in Mumbai, you can expect the meeting to be a novel experience besides being satisfactory as you have been provided with the opportunity by the escorts agency. http://nikitapanday.in
Can’t blame people for thinking that way really 🙂 Many people came into the PC market when Intel was at its best and AMD couldn’t touch that level of performance. It’ll take time for the stigma of ‘inferior’ to wash away.
As for the laptop, I’d suggest waiting for a bit, if at all possible. Intel’s 10th Generation Mobile offerings look pretty neat from a graphics POV and also consume less power. Plus, AMD’s also going to launch the next-gen, Zen 2-based mobile CPUs soon.
I’ve never encountered lag on my laptop discrete GPU, so not too sure what’s happening there. Could be a driver issue. You could try going into the Nvidia control panel and manually setting ‘Photoshop’ and other Adobe apps to Max Performance.
If I did have to pick between those two for those tasks, I’d go with the R5 + 560X + 512. Also, I think you’re talking about the Acer Nitro (looks like it from the specs you mentioned) and it’s a great laptop for sure, Next Level Pc https://nextlevelpc.ma
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
510 Comments
Back to Article
prophet001 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Wooo!Showtime - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Yeah "Wooo!", but maybe not so much. They finally catch up in gaming, and they raise pricing? Actually every new CPU announcement has them catching intel in gaming, and then the 3rd party reviewers get a hold of the CPU's... Looks good, but those price increases along with relatively expensive B, X mobo's, and 3600+ RAM will end up costing more than current Intels. Hopefully Intel cuts pricing. They've been getting over for a decade basically.FireSnake - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Research needs to be covered. Who will pay for research, you?arashi - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD must price low so Intel will lower their prices so I can buy my cheaper Intel chips! /manyidiotssilencer12 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You should be buying AMD. They are succeeding. Amd has PCI-4 and Intel does not. Intel is performing lackluster. /manyidiots. You're rightMDD1963 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
That PCI-e 4.0 *really* helped X570 a lot when 3080/3080 hit the streets, right?Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Intel doesn't manufacture NVIDIA products if you hadn't heard. So yes, PCIe 4.0 indeed DOES help AMD CPUs, which is what today's announcement is about. And all benchmarks confirm this. The battle for CPU supremacy is between, believe it or not, the CPU makers - AMD and Intel. And the new king is AMD. Cry elswhere.Kutark - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
It will once game developers start utilizing HBCC and NVCache (which they will be doing on the new consoles).willis936 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Idk if I can afford AMD anymore.stryfe - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Gonna have to go CyrixLord of the Bored - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Heck yeah, let's get a Cyrix relaunch!lakedude - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Cyrix, Ha! Been a while.Bruta1ity - Tuesday, November 10, 2020 - link
what about an IDT winchipalexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Novaswimwear offers great deals on swimsuits to their customers. We are providing you all types of swimsuit regardless of size. You will get every size from small to large. We never compromise over quality. Novaswimwear is the best online swimwear maker in Australia.We have a professional team to take care about design and color each and everything. Where every business and manufacture converting their business not just online but working to make proficient from a warehouse to customer doorstep. We also take bulk orders if there is any sports event or for your school or university competitions. Nobody wants to be left behind to enjoy swimming under the swimming pool. In order to keep clean the pool water of the pool is chlorinated by chemicals. Usually, traditional clothes get damages in Australia. Manufacture and businessman try to upgrade and maintain their reputation to keep by producing a new quality of chlorine resistance swimwear. Chlorine can damage the elastic fabric. It causes a reduction in the life span of fabric shape as well as quality. On the other hand, chlorine resistant swimsuit is made of a proposition of polyester fabric and it helps you to repel the side effects of chlorine exposure. Extra polyester helps your swimwear from damage so it remains in good shape for a long time. They are durable and possess good elasticity features.
https://www.novaswimwear.com/
alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Girls swimwear sale are in a string bikini meant for lounging on the beach would basically be like jogging in jeans and a sweater. Technically, you could do it, but you’d be much more comfortable in a swimsuit specifically designed for exercise. For training, the most important factor is fit A properly fitting suit is also important to prevent painful chafing. The full range of Nova swimwear sale that has been standard in the "true to size" summer sales for curvy women and fashion models. We have sizes from 14 to 24. You may estimate that you will need a size small or a normal size. The Novaswimwear brand will look trendy and adorable on your curvy body. Discover the sale of women's swimwear and beachwear at Novaswimwear. Shop the latest collection of women's swimwear and beachwear on sale. Find great deals on swimwear in our exclusive women's sale range. Shop for everything from swimsuits, bikinis, and tankinis to beach cover-ups. Every franchise loves the sports illustrated swimsuit edition. Swimsuit has always been a highly anticipated edition of the Sports Illustrated franchise. Sports girls swimwear sale is trendy nowadays especially in females. We have a large range of sporty swimsuits. Our collection includes One-piece and knee-length. It entirely fits the body with a sporty feel. Make a splash and get moving in our bold range of sports swimwear.https://www.novaswimwear.com/girls/girls-jeans-chl...
hugomax - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
@silencer PCI-4 is not needed; and AMD has no integrated GPU /manyidiotsFulljack - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
@hugomax you've never heard AMD G desktop line-up, haven't you,MDD1963 - Monday, October 19, 2020 - link
"Amd has PCI-4 and Intel does not" That sure propelled them into the 'gaming greatness' lead with X570, right? 'Wait until some real PCI-e 4.0 GPUs deliver!", they said...! :)alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
We have designed multi-colored and shoe-making shoes for boys to feel different in variety. These boys swimwear are made of pure chlorine resistant fabric. We set up a variety of beautiful birds and beaches in Australia. Take good care of the feelings and reactions of the boys with the wind. To buy boys swimwear in Australia peruse our large collection of swimwear. These swimsuits are dye sublimated with a groovy purple colored design and are very functional and are purpose made to suit Training and Racing or even relaxing by the pool. Stylish boys swimwear for the holiday look. Swim trunks and beachwear, shop the collection. FREE Shipping for orders over $50.00. The finest quality long-lasting children's swimwear made to the highest standards in Australia. We only use chlorine resistant polyester fabric. Styles include Jammers, Briefs, and Trunks. Made with comfort and durability in mind. They can be bought anywhere online. We also have our own outlet in different Australian areas. We created chlorine resistance swimwear. When looking to purchase a swimsuit, look for our upcoming discounts or coupons. You can buy at cheap rates this way. This swimwear is expensive so students need to be aware of these discounts. They should ask their seniors as well as friends and family members.https://www.novaswimwear.com/boys/boys-racing-skin...
alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Beautiful summer whenever summer hits, there is always wide range of variety of plus size swimwear, swimwear, or bather whatever you name it. It is in market for the Aussie body.In this era, anyone can place an order for different styles they love in bulk from online or physical outlets and right away the order in front of their house doorstep. There are others stingy ways.
There are number of markets where huge variety with awesome pieces of plus size swimsuits or bather available.
The biggest problem is that how to buy a good plus size swimsuit in a local or online market. I mean to say what are pros or cons while purchasing swimwear.
Looking for swimwear to appear fashionable and durable. Then find something that covers up your body part you don’t want to be visible in a public place.
Keep trying out different option and look is it look quite right, if there is a body part of your visible then leave it. Try the next one.
● Don’t compromise quality over price - yes quality comes priority and quality comes with the high price.
Swim with confidence in this summer in the water pool with striped skirted plus size swimwear. This is unique in design. It looks like a halter neck and frill skirt. It is a congratulatory swimwear. It allows you to sunbath in a fashionable way.
https://www.novaswimwear.com/womens/shelf-bra-dahl...
Bruta1ity - Tuesday, November 10, 2020 - link
as it stands the flagship 10900k is £549 in the UK but this is beaten in gaming by the £299 ryzen 5600 and well beaten by the £449 Ryzen 5800x and totally destroyed in every way by the £559 ryzen 5900x an extra £10 is not a lot to pay for a CPU that has 2 extra cores and is anything from 20-50% faster than the £549 intel offering intel will have to cut the prices of its chips in half just to compete at the moment and i dont think the next gen intel chips will regain the crown either as its going to be yet another 14nm rehash of a 15 year old core design with possibly Pcie gen4 bolted on via yet another new chipsetNicon0s - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
>They finally catch up in gaming, and they raise pricing?<Well what would you expect for an overall much better processor?
Dolda2000 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You would normally expect new generations of hardware to increase performance at iso-price. Otherwise, we'd be buying billion-dollar computers these days given the performance increases over the decades.haukionkannel - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Amd has now Intel between hammer and anwill! New 5000 series is faster and more expensive. Old 3000 remains to be the bargain offering. Intel is in the hard spot in between!If you want to get the best bang for the buck... buy amd 3000, if yoy wan to get the greatest and the best buy amd 5000 series. I think that from marketing and economy point amd made smart move in there! If Intel keep current prising amd does get better margings from 5000 series. If Intel reduce prices amd can do the same and keep the same situation. Intel willl have better option below aka amd 3000 series and superior product above. So Intel needs now new product that is really good and Also cheap... and 14nm does not leave much room in there...
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
When a company is no longer competing with low pricing, but rather good performance, price goes up. This is basic capitalism. AMD, ATI, intel, nvidia, 3DFX, literally any company ont he planet will do so in the basence of proper competition.bji - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
That's now how it works. New is better than old and costs more, but eventually newer comes out, new becomes old, and goes down in price to match the previous old price. Now compared to the original old, you are getting new for the same price. So you eventually get higher performance for the same price. Newer now costs when new used to cost, and new costs what old used to cost.The end result after many iterations is that all of newer, new, and old are much, much better than their long-time-ago equivalents at the same price point.
That is where we are today.
The AMD Ryzen 5000 Zen 3 series is now in the 'new' category, is it costs more than 'old' but eventually will cost the same as 'old'.
KAlmquist - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Things work the way bji described for AMD processors. I can't recall cases of Intel lowering the prices of their older processors. A year ago the i9-9980XE was selling for $1,990 even though Intel had announced the 9-10980XE, priced at $979, would be arriving on November 1. (The i9-9980XE and i9-10980XE are essentially the same 18 core processor, but the i9-10980XE has higher turbo frequencies due to tweaks to the 14nm process.)Spunjji - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD have been on catch-up for years - and now they caught up. They don't need to buy market share anymore, they can earn it. I doubt they'd be raising prices above this in future, but part of Lisa Su's mission has been to raise profitability and this ought to do it.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"AMD have been on catch-up for years - and now they caught up." Correction... 'surpassed'.philehidiot - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
All I would say to that is "hopefully". I will never believe a manufacturer's release hype. AMD have a habit of being relatively honest but, I want to see real world reviews before I say anything.I almost got swept up in the nvidia 20xx hype. Then people calmed down and we are seeing the reality.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"I will never believe a manufacturer's release hype"There's no good reason to apply that to AMD at the moment, though. Comparing them to Nvidia in that regard simply isn't warranted. I won't *buy* before the reviews, but I'm not expecting any big upset between now and then.
Kangal - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
No, there is good reason. AMD is not immune to exaggeration, lies, fraud, or corruption. The same goes for other (consumer-friendly) "good guy companies" like LG and even CD Projekt Red.Never Pre-order, and Always wait for Reviews.
^That above mantra have saved people so much headache and money in the past, that its not funny. Let the idiots with more money than sense, let them waste their cash, and take the unnecessary risk in the tech products. If you don't get the CPU, GPU, Console, Phone, Game etc etc upon release, you're actually not missing out. You could get it a couple days later, or a couple weeks.... or even if it is a couple months later you still aren't missing out. In fact, some smarter people make money off these dumb/rich snobs by buying their older hardware at low prices, and flip it, or use it themselves (ergo Salty RTX-2080Ti owners recently).
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
That's not a good reason, it's a truism contradicted by recent evidence. I didn't say we should believe them because they're "good guys", it's because all leaks to this point - and their previous releases - have indicated that these claims are thoroughly plausible.Not sure why the lecture about pre-orders, I just openly said I don't think buying before release and review makes sense.
Kangal - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
That is a good reason.While I don't disagree with your assessment, I'm thoroughly against your premise. Sorry for the lecture, it's just that philehidiot's comment resonanted well with me. And yours was in contrary to it.
My point is, at any time by any company, you can get duped. Wether if that's a paper launch, exaggerated numbers, or just brilliant marketing/hype. Or a combination of the three. You can never know how a product really measures up until it is tested and verified on the basis of merit.
Let's look at an example, AMD's first Bulldozer CPUs, their 4c/8t (dubbed 8-core) seemed like a great product on the announcement and worthy of a pre-order. But they weren't upto snuff against Intel's second-gen Core-i processors of the time. You're point is "now is a different time" and that would be correct. But it is an unnecessary risk. There's no need to take the risk. You don't miss out. FOMO is plain BS. It always pays to be intelligent/skeptical as a consumer.
Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
I think you're still misunderstanding me, because we're in agreement that you shouldn't make a decision to buy before launch, reviews, etc.vanilla_gorilla - Friday, October 16, 2020 - link
He specifically said that you shouldn't buy before reviews but that he doesn't expect any big surprises. AMD has been very accurate for several years about performance improvements in their CPUs. They've developed a track record of integrity. So while it's possible they could suddenly throw it all away its just not _very likely_.JasonMZW20 - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
2017 - Broadwell-E 8-core was $1099 (HEDT). Ryzen 1800X 8-core was $499.It wasn't so long ago that Intel was charging a small fortune to get more than 4-cores and only incrementally updating its processors which needed new motherboards each time.
AMD's pricing isn't unreasonable.
Spunjji - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
Anyone paying attention can see the "logical" progression:2016: "Intel processors cost so much because they are have superior overall performance and perf/watt. Perf/$ is mostly static because AMD suck."
2017: "Intel processors still cost more because they retain an overall performance advantage. Perf/$ is only relevant to scrubs who can't afford the best, perf/watt rules."
2018: "Intel processors cost more for similar performance because they perform better in games. Single-core performance is king."
2019: "Intel processors still cost so much because 99% frame times at 1080p maybe? Who cares about perf/watt anyway. It's about reliability / premium products / etc."
2020: "How dare AMD charge more than Intel for processors that provide better perf/watt and superior single-core performance. Clearly per/$ is the most important metric. There is no excuse for taking advantage of consumers. I might buy Intel in protest because I am angry about this."
Qasar - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
as i said, if intel does it, its perfectly fine. if amd does it, its a crime, and people loose their minds.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
lol - Intel been charging $1000 for its flagship CPUs for ages. AMD puts theirs at $549 and $799 and Intel fans cry foul. Unbelievable.derstef - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
EXACTLY! even with the 50$ plus the value is really incredible ... 3 years ago, when AMD wasn't that competitive, you had to pay the same amount for 4 cores instead of 16 ...peevee - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
False, nobody paid $800 for 4 cores 3 years ago. In fact, 9 years ago 4 cores were only $300.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
This after AMD spent the past three years forcing Intel to completely redefine the price, positioning and construction of their entire product range, too."Oh noes, now they actually want to make profit, this makes them bad."
From a personal perspective it chafes - I've never been someone who could spend $400+ on a CPU - but I don't have to. If I can't afford the 5600X, I'll get a 3000 series on discount and still get a better combination of performance per dollar and power consumption than Intel can offer. Happy times.
nirolf - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Even more, you can upgrade later to one of the 5000 series when prices go down. Unlike Intel who keeps changing sockets for no real reason.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
That's basically my plan!M O B - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Fair comment, but its not the AMD high-end pricing that bothers me.It's $300 for a 6-core CPU that I can't stomach. That will drive many people to older AMD CPUs, or perhaps even to Intel 6-core CPUs after they crunch the numbers.
Impulses - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
I honestly don't understand how either brand still has so many diehards... My one and only AMD system was a s939 A64 (struggling to remember the model, gasp! a Winchester I think), had 3 Intel desktops since then, but it's looking like my next upgrade (from a 6700K) will inevitably be my 2nd AMD. Why wouldn't you just buy whatevs the best bang for your buck and usage case?These aren't cameras or phones where there's some degree of ecosystem lock-in, or something like audio where more subjective preferences factor in... CPU/GPU fan debates always seemed like the most inane hobby battle ever. /shrug
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I think there's a difference between this time and the other occasions on which AMD has claimed to beat Intel on gaming:AMD is now providing many more benchmarks, instead of basing its leadership claim on a single title such as CS:GO.
With that being said, AMD's newfound gaming lead is still very small. So the price increase, even though not that bad on the upper end of their lineup (the 5900X is a better deal than the 10900K and the 5950X simply has no competition), really does hurt the value proposition of its lower-end models.
The 4800X is going to be $100 more expensive than the 10700K for the same core count and near identical gaming performance. The 6-core 4600X is going to be $40 more than the equivalent 10600K, and just $50 cheaper than the 8-core 10700K. It's simply nonsensical.
People who game will likely go for the lower-end models, and on the lower-end AMD's products won't make much economical sense. They may be much better than Intel's offerings on productivity, but that is not important on the low-end. The pure gaming lead is just too small to justify the price hike on these models.
nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It's 5000-series, not 4000.5600X vs. 10600K will be an interesting story. It looks like 5600X could be 15% faster than 10600K in gaming, which is bigger than the 3600X to 10600K gap. Meanwhile, the 5600X will use less energy and it's the only one in that list that comes with a bundled cooler, apparently. Also, I'm seeing a $25 price difference, not $40.
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Hahaha, thanks for the correction. I still didn't get used to AMD skipping the 4000-series.Still, I have to disagree with you. There is no way for the 5600X to be 15% faster in gaming than the 10600K. The 5900X has two more cores than the 10900K and its average gaming lead is just 7%. So, when we compare a 6-core AMD part to a 6-core Intel one, I wouldn't expect a two digit leap, if there remains any gaming superiority at all.
According to Tom's Hardware, the 10600KF's MSRP is $237. That's actually $60 less than the 5600X's. The 10700KF is just $50 more than the 5600X, and $100 less than the 5800X.
You're right that the Zen 3 CPUs are more energy efficient and that the 5600X comes with a cooler, but I still fear it won't be enough for AMD to be the best pure gaming deal on that price range.
If you factor productivity, that's another thing, since AMD's last gen was already superior to Intel on this regard, and it's going to expand its lead a lot thanks to the 19% IPC gains. But on the lower end where productivity doesn't matter that much, I guess AMD could do a lot better without a 20% price hike on the 5600X.
nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I found a benchmark showing 3600X at about 92% of 10600K for some game at 1080p. I multiply 0.92 by 1.26 (which I assume is a combo of IPC, clock gains, and latency improvements), and I get around 1.15. Feel free to use different numbers, or we can just wait for real benchmarks.I'm seeing 10600K (not KF or non-K) for $275 on Amazon, $270 at Micro Center.
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Your calculation really does make sense, but if AMD had such a lead with the 5600X over the 10600K, it would have been a weird decision to showcase the twice smaller 5900X's lead in the presentation instead.FreckledTrout - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Naw, AMD want you to buy the 5900x. Obviously that is where they margins lie.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Oddly enough tech companies tend to tout their flagship. Who knew?Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Watching Hardware Unboxed's analysis video, it seems review outlets may have additional AMD slides.AMD claim 5600X leads the 10600K by 13% in perf/$ in 1080p gaming, 19% in single threaded and 20% in multi-threaded.
Since price quoted for both is the same - MSRP of $299 - performance delta would be the same +13% (for not-even-close-to-GPU-bound high refresh rate gaming).
Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Most games don't fully utilize more than 6 cores. If there are more available, sure the threads will be spread across all of them, but then the usages for some cores will be in the 25 - 50% range.This means that the 5900X would get little benefit (depending on game, no benefit at all) from the two extra cores compared to the 10900K.
I think it's certainly possible the 5600X will be well ahead of 10600K, but not a given. Reviews will tell.
1 penny left and I am all in - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Listening to yourself talking about multicores cpu for game. Pure logic isn't it.I bought AMD 8cores labtop $1.6K and going to get 16cores 5950x soon when ever it came out. Why? for the past 10years, i tried to buy Intel CPU system and my pocket is not deep enough to do more than 4 cores, now AMD make and offers like 5950x less than $1k, this I can't refuse.
msroadkill612 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
The 5800x promises to be the gaming champ - a single chiplet using a single cache.alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
We provides back style ladies swimwear Australia. We have stock of different back styles. They are beautifully designed. They will secure you in the water. The major benefit of the back styles is that they give you freedom of movement. These back styles are designed to support you in every aspect.These designs are basically for those who swim for fitness. They also cover professional trainers. Especially girls competition swimwear has such back styles. The venue for the competitions are water pools. Back styles are suitable for leisure modes. I will suggest you that you should go for the one that makes you comfortable.
These designs are great for those girls competition swimwear who need freedom of movement. It is also the best support for them. These designs have a shelf bra to feel light plus to provide you modesty. They have wider straps to secure fitting. These designs are available in the old classic Cottesloe style and Black / Navy plus with trendy prints such as Oliver Action back, Bolt Speed back. We have made it chlorine-proof with techno fabric Eco last material. Novaswimwear Jammer & brief styles provide great freedom of movement for active swimmers. These comfortable designs are more proficient and reliable for athletic physique.
https://www.novaswimwear.com/featured-categories/g...
Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
And of course AM4 socket platform remains. Good luck purchasing Intel's next gen CPUs knowing the die shrinkage issues they've had and openly discuss are ongoing AND will require switching (yet again... sigh) to a new socket. Intel can't get their s*** straight in the CPU market. AMD on the other hand already had the price performance crown with 3000 series in Ryzen 3rd gen (and prior) and now rules the roost w/ Zen 3 5000 series. What's Intel announced? Oh yeah... more fabrication setbacks. The nail is in the coffin. Get over it. The king is dead. Long live the (new) king.JfromImaginstuff - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Now I wouldn't say dead, this same thing happened a few short years ago when AMD was king the last time. Not a fanboy but an observer here, the tide has ebbed and flowed between AMD and Intel, this has happened in the past and will happen again eventually Intel will take back the crown and then AMD will try to get it back....... so long as arm doesn't kill them bothSpunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
JfromImaginstuff is right here. Intel's core designs were clearly stronger than AMD's up until now - they just couldn't manufacture them with decent yields or power characteristics. Once they sort that out (and they seem to be making progress) we'll have actual competition again. But I'm very, very glad to see AMD making hay while the sun shines.ArcadeEngineer - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Intel have already said that Rocket Lake-S is compatible with Z490 boardsalexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
When You will have to spend a considerable amount of money out of your pocket to purchase new swimwear. Hence, you are concerned about the returns that you are getting out of your swimwear. In fact, you expect them to last for a longer period. Therefore, we encourage you to go ahead and purchase Girls Australian Made Chlorine Tough Swimwear. They will be able to help you with saving a considerable amount of money in the long run.If you are still not convinced, go ahead, and look at all the benefits that you can experience. Then you will purchase such swimwear without thinking twice.
● They will not lose their shape
Chlorine resistant girls’ bathers you purchase will never lose their shape. That is because they can control the impact created by chlorine and retain their good shape. You can always keep the swimwear in perfect condition. When you are getting such a perfect fit, you will not come across the need to spend more money and purchase new swimwear. This is one of the most prominent examples available to show how chlorine resistant girls racing swimwear can be cheap swimwear.
● Colors will not fade out
At the time of purchasing girl’s swimwear, you often tend to go ahead with colorful options available in the market. Like, you do not expect colors offered out of swimwear to fade out along with time. However, chlorine can interact with the colors of your fabric. This will make the colors to fade away.
As you can see, chlorine resistant swimwear will be able to deliver many benefits on your way. All these benefits will help you with saving a considerable amount of money. That is why you should not think twice before you purchase Chlorine resistant swimwear. Even if you must spend more money on buying them, you will be able to use them for an extended duration of time, which ensures the delivery of best returns out of your investment.
https://www.novaswimwear.com/sale/
alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Pool water is always chlorinated with chemicals. Novaswimwear makes chlorine resistant swimwear for their swimmer customers such as mens swimwear Australia. Our products are totally Australian made swimwear. Rashies are common for sunburn but you also have to sit in the sun. We make womens to spend worry free moments under the sun.Now it is summer season. That means the weather is going to heat up. Finally the days to swim in the pool are imminent. Mens swimwear Australia helps men to protect from sun and UV rays. So they can have a lot of fun with water. Novaswimwear puts all efforts to design this chlorine resistant swimwear for their customers. These designs include jammer, brief and trunk. We have all ranges of sizes for every type of body. In this summer season, people want to take a quick dip in the pool. So the sun is on the top of your head. It can burn your skin. We want craft and design in addition to resistance from sunburn. Fabric- After taking a bath on the beach, if you are going home with wet bathers, it is not good for you or anybody. Search out for comfortable fabric. It has features that it can dry up quickly. It should have chlorine-resistance characteristics. It helps to keep swimsuits in good shape and color for longer periods of time.
https://www.novaswimwear.com/girls/girls-sport-bac...
peevee - Monday, October 19, 2020 - link
"Good luck purchasing Intel's next gen CPUs knowing the die shrinkage issues they've had and openly discuss are ongoing AND will require switching (yet again... sigh) to a new socket"Good luck thinking that the NEXT AMD CPU will still remain on AM4.
DDR5 will require new socket, coming out with the new range of CPUs to be sold in 2021 with DDR still is backwards. Everybody would be better off if AMD had indeed changed the socket for DDR5 compatibility earlier than later.
Stu7nm3dflash - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Don’t feel too bad, you can still get a 4000 series APU, mini PC, I wish I waited and got one of those, less building, postage time, money, frustration. Put in some laptop RAM, PCIe 3 and SATA flash, from the same company, get express postage, to the newsagent. Wish I had, I’ll just have to wait, for the 5000 series APU’s, in the middle of next year.msroadkill612 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Yep - a $100 APU, 16GB, nvme... is a mighty little tank engine.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Your analysis is rather one sided, and maybe more than a little pro-Intel...You omit that to run the 10700K, you need a new motherboard, and you will need a Z class motherboard, thats $300 on top of the price you pay for your 10700K. For that additional $300, you'll get fewer PCI-e lanes, and they will be slower. So on the few Intel boards that will allow bifurcation of the PCE-e x16 slot, you'll have fewer SATA ports and fewer USB ports, and you won't be able to use PCI-e gen 4 storage...
Also, you'll need a massive and v/ expensive cooler to deal with the 229 watts of heat the 10700K will produce when it turbos, or you can save money on that massive cooler, and the CPU will never boot to anywhere near its top speed, and you'll be playing games on a CPU thats slower than a AMD 3500 and be paying twice the price...
Oh, and 100 watts extra on your electricity bill, always and forever! And if you have air-con, an additional 100 Watts to remove the heat from your room/home!
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I have a Ryzen PC, so for me a new morherboard wouldn't be required. But people making a Ryzen build from scratch would need a new motherboard anyway, and they will be getting no upgradeability since it's the last gen on AM4. AMD's new motherboards aren't also what I would call cheap, specially since they got PCI-E 4.0.The most appealing part of your argument would be about cooling Intel CPUs. But given that only the 5600X comes with a bundled cooler, the 5800X would give you such an expense as well.
As a matter of fact, I think that the 5800X is the most oddly priced of these CPUs. If I ever go Zen 3, I will pay $100 more and get 4 more cores on the 5900X, which has the best price proposition.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"But people making a Ryzen build from scratch would need a new motherboard anyway"But the millions and millions who already have a AMD X570/B450/A420 platform, won't, so that's a $300 saving for them!
"only the 5600X comes with a bundled cooler, the 5800X would give you such an expense as well"
Err, nope! Point to a single review that shows how a Ryzen CPU draws 229 Watts in normal usage! Unlike an Intel CPU, you can save $100 just on the cooling! Like I said, you can save that amount too on Intel, butthen again you can forget about that Turbo boost speed, and your CPU will run like a $150 AMD one!
Don;t get me wrong, until 5th November, there are reasons to have bought an Intel CPU, and maybe after 5th November there might be reasons to still buy one, but the use case will be so niche after that date, you've got to have reasons you so far haven;t been able to articulate.
Its not good to fan-boy a company, any company. I've owned both Intel and AMD, but really I can't see anyone but Fan boys highlighting Intel from next month, as to so so makes no sense! I'm running a 3950X right now, and this launch gives me no compelling reason to upgrade, but would I buy Intel, nope! Too expensive, to restrictive an eco-system (try getting 3200Mhz memory on a H series motherboard), and too high a TDP, and from whats happened today, at best they now tie with AMD.
Intel were wee-weeing and laughing at AMD three yars ago about their 'glued together CPU', when the market place was crying out for more cores...
Intel is reaping what it sowed, nothing more nothing less and to shill form them appears at best daft to me...,
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
But if you're already on AM4, it's not like it would make any sense to consider going Intel.People who will have to choose between those two platforms for a new build are those who don't have an AM4 chipset. That's why I didn't take that as an argument for Zen 3's value proposition.
About cooling the 5800X versus the 10700KF... Look, the 10700KF really does require better cooling to properly boost. However, if you're spending $450 on a CPU will you really go cheap on it's cooling system? Specially with AMD insinuating that the Wraith Spyre would not unleash the 5800X's full potential?
I don't think that you will spend $100 more in cooling by getting a 10700KF. So your build will also likely remain cheaper overall. If your sole purpose is gaming I don't think that long-term electricity bills will by themselves justify the more expensive option.
And look, I'm not an Intel fanboy. My gaming rig is Ryzen based, and the 5900X is the most appealing CPU available IMO. But I'm not an AMD fanboy either. I'm very annoyed by fanboyism.
That's why I started commenting here after getting quite bothered by people accepting a 20% price hike on the lower-end models and applauding AMD unconditionally as if they were cattle. It's because of fans like those (and corrupt press) that Intel and Nvidia kept milking customers generation after generation when they had no real competition.
I'm glad that Anandtech noticed the hike and interrogated AMD on this topic. Otherwise, it could have been part of the problem, such as Tom's Hardware saying "just buy it" about Nvidia's Turing, when that generation brought an almost null performance increase over Pascal, dollar per dollar.
I understand why you dislike Intel, and I dislike it too. But I don't think this is a good enough reason to unconditionally pander AMD.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
getting quite bothered by people accepting a 20% price hike on the lower-end models and applauding AMD unconditionally as if they were cattle"Not sure why? AMD had to artificially lower heir prices to compete with the Intel fanboys. The 1800X was launched at $499 I think, but within weeks was at $449, and within a few months was selling at $399.
AMD haven't been able to hold their price in the face of fools/idiots buying Intel, "cos its the fastest in'it"?
Even though AMD has been outselling Intel by 90% in market share, it has only been getting 60% of the total CPU spend (see Mindshare's charts). Intel is still raking it in, because consumers spend more with Intel. Look at the 7980XE; $2,000 !!!
If AMD is to succeed with Zen 6 and if there is to be a Zen 8, AMD needs that additional revenue, it needs to drive its R&D. Intel still outspends AMD on R&D by an order of several magnitudes. Intel's spend on R&D is more than AMD's entire income for the year!
Intel will recover, 2022 looks likely for 10nm to be ready, and even if it isn't Intel's 7nm will likely launch 2022/23 and that will likely beast AMD at 5nm, and unless you want there to be a return of Intel again in the driving seat for another 10 years of stagnation, you'll pay the slightly higher price, or you'll wait a few months for supply to outstrip demand and pay the lower price...
If you persist in demanding always lower prices, you'll be left with just Intel... Then you'll have reason to complain!
Rather than complaining abut AMD, maybe complain about the fools that have caused this; the idiots paying $2,000 for a gaming CPU that have given Intel a massive financial cushion so large they can lose 90% market share in the enthusiast space, and still not care! Its just like the idiots paying $1,500 for a GPU...
Its not AMD's fault that people are stupid, so complain about the stupids, not AMD!
gescom - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"Intel will recover, 2022 looks likely for 10nm to be ready, and even if it isn't Intel's 7nm will likely launch 2022/23 and that will likely beast AMD at 5nm"Good luck with Intel's 7nm competing with ryzen 3nm+ 8000 cpu series.
Spunjji - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
@Notagaintoday nailed it there. Not much more to say.1 penny left and I am all in - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Really, like AMD was trying to beat Intel for the last 10 years. You think Intel will slap together a chip that will out do AMD in a few years. I think you are dreaming. Intel stuck with 14nm and milk as much as they can on consumers. Oh, they can't even do 10nm for that matter and you think 7nm cpu process. You are right, I don't want to pay $2000 intel 10cores cpu but I will buy 16 cores AMD for $800.Stu7nm3dflash - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Yeah, I’ve got a B450 MB, Ryzen 3 3100, I wanted some 7nm, but as I increased my ambitions, I wound up with enough components to make another cheap computer. I should have waited till the 4000 series APU, mini PCs came out. $A600, I guess that’s $US440, for the bare bones, another $A400, $US300, for the laptop RAM 16GB, PCIe 3 flash 500GB, 1TB flash drive. So much less work and money, but it’s always this way, I can one day get a 5000 series APU.Maybe I’ll get a 7nm graphics card, I was just tempted to go back into the game, by my iPad mini 5 having a 7nm chip, at 6.9 billion transistors and 5 trillion floating point operations, per second. Things haven’t changed much in the last 7 years. RAM is only double the speed, flash triple the speed, nearly quadruple the speed on the processor, those stupid case to motherboard pins, that you can hardly read, with glasses, a torch and a motherboard manual.
But I did get a factory reset down to 18 minutes, good fast memory, can pass even Microsoft’s bloat ware, through billions of transistors at teraflops, it’s still obsessing though, set top boxes, tablets are more convenient. A new XboxS, can crunch 5 teraflops, with it’s 16GB of GDDR6, 8CPU cores who knows how many GPU cores, fast flash, for $US 299 I think.
stryfe - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"Unlike an Intel CPU, you can save $100 just on the cooling!"You can buy a Noctua NH-D15 for <$100 and cool any of these CPUs from either Intel or AMD. Not sure how you'd save $100 when the cooler costs less than that.
lmcd - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
There was 0 good reason to buy X570 at launch and B550 barely launched in the last half year. The only people desperate for PCIe 4.0 wanted it for storage bandwidth, which is niche as can be. That leaves the people with a beta bios for their upgrade path. A good value proposition once it's done, but Rocket Lake will be out practically by the time those beta bioses are trustworthy.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
lmcd in with the goalpost move as per usual."It may be better, but here are some reasons why I'd rather wait for an Intel product that won't be out until at least 2 months later and will almost certainly be slower with higher power draw".
msroadkill612 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Rot. There will be every reason you will regret not getting the extra options x570 buys for a tiny premium.rrinker - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
$170 is an expensive motherboard? And that's a X570, not a lesser one, with all the features but the crazy RGB lights. Multiple M.2 PCIE 4.0, plenty of SATA, USB, etc. And a main brand, not one of the "who?" ones no one's ever heard of. Built two systems at the same time with this board, very happy with it and glad I didn't go for one of the way more expensive variations just to get more flashy RGB or a different pattern of colors on the heat sinks which I can't see anyway in the non-window cases. And glad I didn't go for a lesser feature B550, some of which sell for MORE than this X570 (go figure).Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
A $75 b450 also works. AMD's got it covered vs their competitor in the compatibility race, the pricing race, the performance race. Intel fangirls crying foul.alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
At the time of purchasing girls bathers, competition swimwear, and active wear includes something to suit all body shapes and sizes, with bold statement prints, girls bathers, contrasting textures, and beautiful lines. Our range includes everything from supportive swimsuits designed for active outings through to detailed and delicate bikinis for those girls racing swimwear, relaxed days by the beach. Made to be worn on the beach and in the water, the sleek styles suit the action of every adventure for girls swimwear. Australia market does consider their youth to get involved in these sports of swimming to build their nation strong and healthy. So they put top priority for businessmen and other investors like school and club to manufacture girls bathers and promote these activities. These businessmen put lots of effort into bringing new ideas and upgrading their product it impacts there to use their products. Government of Australia trying hard to groom up their kids. They also develop a number of swimming clubs to get register and get ready for swimming competitions. On the other hand, garment manufacture is also trying hard to sewing quality swimwear not just for only for adult trainers or boys but also for girls’ category and novaswimwear is leading in that field.https://www.novaswimwear.com/girls/girls-jeans-chl...
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
MASSIVE COOLER?Really? A basic sub $90 AIO keeps the 10700k well below throttling temperatures and is easy to install. If you cant afford a $90 cooler you frankly cant afford a $300+ CPU.
Same for electricity. Electricity is CHEAP. The difference betweeen a 5700 and a 10700 will be maybe at WORST $10-15 a year for most people. Same as above, if that electrical cost is an issue to you you shouldnt be buying a $300 CPU in the first place.
When it comes to games, the AMD 3500 is NOT faster then a 10700k. I have 0 clue where you pulled that fact from.
asmian - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
> Electricity is CHEAP.Maybe where you live. You can't make that generalisation for a planet. And that just means the cost of producing has been cut somewhere in the supply chain you think you're benefitting from - probably coal or other environmentally destructive sources. Remember how "cheap" your electricity is when you next see news of wildfires and hurricanes... maybe coming to YOUR backyard soon.
hugomax - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
@asmian no electricity is really cheap; or does the discussion for using it in cars make sense any way?asmian - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
It's being used in cars because it's ultimately cleaner. Full stop. If it was just about cost people would still be buying diesel, but that kills people with the exhaust nox and particulates. Did you see photos from all round the world during the lockdowns earlier this year of cities visible for the first time without all the choking smog? THAT'S why electricity in cars.But my point was that "cheap" is an extremely relative term, and in some places it is relatively expensive, not subsidised, or stacked with taxes that reflect the environmental cost of production. The original poster is lucky, but only relatively so, because his "cheap" will likely come back to bite him or his children or grandchildren in the ass.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
A basic sub $90 AIO keeps the 10700k well below throttling temperatures"And yet, you only need a $30 one to keep an AMD CPU cool! The difference is because AMD CPU's don't produce 229 Watts of heat! The 10700K does!
"If you cant afford a $90 cooler you frankly cant afford a $300+ CPU"
So you're saying that the $60 extra you spend on the Intel cooler doen;t bother you... Okay, pay $60 now to the cats charity that Gamer Nexus supports. You can do that everyday and post the receipts to his channel. After all, if you can;t afford $0 you should have a CU right!
Hung by your own words - LOL!
"The difference betweeen a 5700 and a 10700 will be maybe at WORST $10-15 a year for most people"
Not sure what world you live in. On planet earth, PC on 2 hours a day burning an additional 100 watts. Assuming $0.25 per KWh, thats 50 cents a day, or $182.50 a year!
So now as that means nothing to you, please again donate to charity...
"When it comes to games, the AMD 3500 is NOT faster then a 10700k. I have 0 clue where you "pulled that fact from"
You must have difficulty with words, as I sad it would be if you tried sticking a $30 cooler on it. That's the same $30 cooler that would enable the AMD CPU top run at max, as its TDP is over 50% lower!
LOL!
Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Not again today, please redo your math. According to your math someone with a 10700k used 2kw more power everyday. 100w/1kwh =0.1kwh multiplied by 2 gets you 0.2kwh. At $0.25 per kWh(us avg is between 0.10 and 0.15) that’s 5 cents a day. Or $18.25 at your inflated electricity prices.Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Also 229-142 is equal to 87 watts not 100. At 25 cents per kWh and using the above math that’s $15.88 per year. Using a more reasonable 12.5 cents per kWh will gets you an extra $7.94 per yearOtritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
And if someone can buy a 300 dollar cpu and not afford an additional 60 dollars, I would be concerned about their financial situation and recommend cutting back on their computer expenditures. Like Ryzen 3000 is awesome, and much cheaper, meaning better on a tight budgetcalc76 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Otritus, I think you failed at the math. If someone said the Intel cpu used 2kW more power every day, they likely meant 2kWh, which would mean the 10900K pulled ~ 80W more at the wall than the AMD. I am not making a judgement on whether the 2kWh number is accurate.However, if accurate, the math would actually be (2kWh * $0.25) $0.50 per day or (2kWh * $0.50 * 365.25) ~ $182.63 per year.
For it to only be $18.25 more per year the wall difference would have to be only ~ 8W.
calc76 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Otritus, and to explain in detail how you convert Watts at the wall under continuous use to kWh used.(X W) at the wall under continuous use is equal to (X Wh) when used for an hour.
In the example of 87W under continuous use that is 87Wh * 24h = 2088Wh used for a day
2088Wh is the same as 2.088kWh.
You did some sort of strange math to come up with 2088Wh used is equal to 0.2kWh, which is not accurate.
calc76 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Never mind the two of you guys were mixing up time used, which confused me.Notagaintoday was saying he was using 2 hours a day but was actually quoting pricing for roughly 24 hours a day usage.
At +87W and only 2 hours a day it only uses an extra ~ 63kWh in a year, which is even cheaper than Otritus noted at $15.75
(87W * 2h * 365.25 days) / 1000 = 63.6kWh
63.6kWh * $0.25 = $15.90
If you are using the cpu as a server or constantly running something in the background, eg seti then +87W would 762.6kWh at $190.65
The pricing would adjust slightly up or down for actual watts used.
Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Calc76, you got about the same values I did at 87 watts for 2 hours a day. However, notagaintoday used 2 hours a day and 100 watts as an example, but quoted $182.5 vs 15 - 19 dollars(I used 365 days vs 365.25). So, I felt that they simply forgot to convert cWh to kWh. Which inflates prices by about the same order (x10). Your 24/7 usage seems similar to mine, although I didnt convert to 1 year pricing, so its a rough estimate.liquid_c - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
During normal, everyday intensive gaming, the 10700k will never pass 120 watts. Ever. Regardless of the game. Unless all you do with your CPU is stress test it with Prime95.silencer12 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The big difference is AMD is winning and Intel is not.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD is now providing many more benchmarks, instead of basing its leadership claim on a single title such as CS:GO"Try reading/watching the launch video, its got loads of titles...
Fan boys, LOL!
Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Gio97BR. Get a clue, kid. You do realize all these prices are a click away. These are not political opinions on Twitter or something, everyone can fact check in seconds. And 4800x? 4600X? There is no such thing. WHy do this to your credibility, bruh? AMD already had the price/performance crown. Now they have the flagship crown AND the 5900 & 5950X, which smoke Intel's i9 10900s, are cheaper. I smell a butthurt Intel fan. Moving on....peevee - Monday, October 19, 2020 - link
"The 4800X is going to be $100 more expensive than the 10700K for the same core count and near identical gaming performance. The 6-core 4600X is going to be $40 more than the equivalent 10600K, and just $50 cheaper than the 8-core 10700K. It's simply nonsensical."5800X and 5600X, but the point stands. Especially with very expensive X570 boards and no built-in business/backup graphics.
Withou ~$150 discounts, these CPUs are not going to be a hit.
Qasar - Monday, October 19, 2020 - link
you do know there are less expensive x570 boards, right ? picked up one for a 3600x that was about $200 cdn, i wouldnt call that expensiveRickiTicki - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I think the big advantage of AMD is that you don't need new motherboard with every new chip release. AMD has been very good about keeping the same socket/motherboard for multiple generations.SirMaster - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Well that's not an advantage this generation for new AMD buyers who are coming over from Intel.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
But come on, now one has bought Intel since 5th Gen and actually expected any advantage. They've bought Intel because it was the fastest, and now AMD is the fastest...Over the past few Generations people have moved on, leaving only Intel Fan Boys to keep buying Intel, that's why AMD has approaching 90% market share in the enthusiast space!
liquid_c - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Jesus fuck, you really like to write out of your ass, don’t you? 90% enthusiast market share? In what utopian world is that even a possibility? “Intel Fan Boys” - this is the writing of someone who’s spiteful as hell.Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I mean, I'm a Ryzen owner, so I wouldn't need a new morherboard goingGio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I sent the last comment by accident, lol.So, what I'd say is that your argument is correct, but it doesn't apply to this release specifically, since it will be the last one on AM4. So people building from scratch right now will also have a dead-end platform.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"So people building from scratch right now will also have a dead-end platform"Whilst that is true, it doesn;t seem to have stopped people buying Intel Z series motherboards these past few years. Every generation has quite literally been DOA, and even with Z490, Intel's newest platform, there is no guarantee that motherboard range will even get PCI-e gen 4 with 11th Gen Intel CPUs! Sure it might be on a few CPU's, and work with a few specific motherboards, but as you won't know which when you purchase, you;re at least getting some certainty with AMD...
Faster PCI-e Gen 4 and more PCIe lanes is a given on AMD (so more USB/SATA ports too), no matter what motherboard CPU/ combo you buy, and you can't say that of Intel...
Quantumz0d - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Stop your bullshit AMD nonsensical fanboying man.I'm about to buy a fucking new PC, and what that guy says is correct. AM4 is dead end. X570 is last, Z590 will get chipset parity on X570 despite being a fucking DMI 3.0 but the fact is there's one more option for Z490 owners and these slides are nowhere showing massive boost on avg increase in FPS, it will reach Intel but not beat by a huge margin like how 3950X did to X299. And Intel is not going to cede everything to AMD on gaming, as it's their last stand SMT Is over for Intel with Zen 2 only, their new RKL will definitely beat this new lineup by single digit or double digits, still not much would be shown either due to 14nm and backport.
Intel Mobos are always 2 gen added with Tick Tock. So the buyers enjoyed top class gaming performance for years, until 2020 how are they EOL ? 8700K still performs excellently, the issue is with 7700K machines still they are not dead, fucking 2600K is still a CPU that can game, and if you want to make a point then that X370 is dead, stupid mobos with bs issues and they are dead end same for Zen and Zen+ and you have memory issues with Zen+ also on Intel none of them.
X470 had BIOS problems because no one trusted AMD, MAX mobos with more memory for BIOS is what people need. There's no b.s certainty or uncertainty here with Intel, PCIe 4 is useless for GPUs and SSDs are only way to see, the major advantage of X570 is chipset lane parity and I/O that's now coming to Z590. It's all about market, it's pointless to rave about how great Ryzen 5000 is and spreading Intel hate all over the place.
More SATA ports ? Care to show me which Mainstream top mobo has more than 8 SATA connections, none of them will have frigging high end only have 8, rest and many have 6 SATA.
Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
lol - stating facts is now considered 'bullshit' and 'fanboyism'. Look in the mirror. AM4 socket has lasted for ages, still going. Can't go forever - Intel fanboys such as yourself know a LOT about changing sockets. You brought changing sockets up... now sink in the hypocrisy, fanboy.You state, "it's pointless to rave about how great Ryzen 5000 is and spreading Intel hate all over the place."
Pure emotional projection. Cheering AMD is not "hating". An Intel fanboy might feel it this way, but that's not how psychology works. YOU defending Intel in the face of AMD supremacy is brand loyalty. We get it, you're butthurt. Too bad.
Spread your anger at Intel for screwing up their fab process for... idk how long and how far forward - but you can just read their press releases admitting to it. Direct that frustration at your idol, Intel - not the wearer of the crown, AMD.
1 penny left and I am all in - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
What the matter when someone getting better stuff for cheap? I don't like neither Intel nor AMD to get that straight. When you have Intel with 4 cores forever over 10years and little or no improvement vs AMD trying to improve and they really put out to is improving for cheap, I will go with that. People says it can't be done with multi-cores doing better than what Intel have for the price, and AMD proving that is full of BS. If you think 14nm cpu is better go ahead. I am going to buy 5950x cpu when it is out and support whomever trying to improve latest tech. Everything I have from Intel are now dead end anyway. Like I said, i support people whom willing to improve and for now AMD.danjw - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
From what I have read, this is expected to be the last generation on this socket. That is because they are expected to go with DDR5 for the next generation. So, while what you say is true, it doesn't seem to fit for these processors.5080 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Intel's higher power usage alone will cost you more in a year than the price difference between the i9 and 5950X.Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Assuming no price gauging on amd. 799-529 = 270 dollar. At electricity cost of 15 cents per kWh, you are looking at needing to consume 1.8mwh to equalize costs. 254-142 = 112 watts. 1.8mwh/112w gets you 16071 hours. Using your computer at full throttle 24 hours a day, it would take you 670 days to break even, or about 1 year and 10 months. Full throttle for 8 hours a day would take you 5.5 years to pay the different. At 4 hours a day it would be 11 years. As a proud owner of r5 1600af I am really disappointed by the r7 and r5 price hikes. Performance per dollar is either the same or lower, when we know amd can sell these chips for cheaper and make a healthy profit. Looks like my next build will have Ryzen 3000 in it b/c the price per dollar is intel like on these new 5000 series cpus5080 - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
You forgot the air conditioner needs to cool the i9 generated heat back to a comfortable level :)1 penny left and I am all in - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Kind of funny when Intel have i9 10cores for $2k now drop to $ 600. vs 3970x Threadrippers for same price $2k with 32cores. Now with 5950x with 16cores for $800 from the start. What a level drag Intel did all this time on consumers? I am going to buy 5950x just to show support for AMD and have lot of fun with multi-cores programsnandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
This is the price of ineffectual competition from Intel. The AMD chips win in single-threaded, core count, and power efficiency.If Intel mounts an effective response in March 2021, AMD will lower the prices, and maybe launch more XT versions.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If Intel mounts an effective response in March 2021, AMD will lower the prices, and maybe launch more XT versions2Forget the XT versions, AMD's roadmap shows 5nm Zen 4 chips launching in 2021!
nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Yeah, but I don't expect Zen 4 until the very end of 2021, possibly a staggered release into early 2022.There have been rumors of a Zen 3(+) refresh (Warhol), maybe to introduce the new AM5 socket.
Whatever the case, there's plenty of time to release something (not Zen 4) in between March and December. Even if it's just another XT-like CPU that's 4% better.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Yeah, but I don't expect Zen 4 until the very end of 2021, possibly a staggered release into early 2022"That's funny, because AMD's road map shows mid 2021,on the AM5 socket. Its a totally new architecture so isn;t really ties to this release...
So unless you're Lisa Su, it appears you need to post less, and read more?
nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I don't know what roadmaps you're looking at, but if you think Zen 4 is going to come out less than 12 months after Zen 3, you may be disappointed.https://www.notebookcheck.net/Leaked-roadmap-sugge...
mdriftmeyer - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
AMD has been testing Zen 4 on TSMC 5nm node for the past two quarters.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"So unless you're Lisa Su, it appears you need to post less, and read more?"I know exactly where you're getting this info from, and it really isn't presented with that level of confidence or specificity. Perhaps take your own advice.
switters1 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
WOW! A price bump of $50.00. For a potential 19% increase in performance? May have to sell a kidney. Relatively expensive mobos, RAM?? RAM prices are decreasing across the board by 10%+. Anyone who has been paying attention to Zen progression and has common sense (OR does anything other than solely gaming) is most likely prepared to drop the new CPU's in their existing AM4 socket mobo. Despite Rocket Lake having PCIE 4 support, the z490 chipset doesn't, so Intel fanboys will be restricted to 1 PCIE 4 NVME and a GPU (or invest in yet another Intel chipset with PCIE 4 support and another motherboard. I applaud AMD in their advances AND consistency!! Go for the best bang for your buck is smart.Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
$50 is a 20% price hike between the 3600X and the 5600X, which is more than the performance uplift you're claiming to expect.$50 is a lot, specially on the lower-end. On the higher-end it can be meaningless, specially since Intel has no competition to the 5900X and the 5950X.
But on the lower-end it can make AMD not be the best value for people whose only goal is to game.
nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD basically said "26% better gaming performance". Most of that is from the IPC improvement, but some is from higher clocks and the core complex die (unified 32 MB cache linked to 8 cores). Some non-gaming tasks should also see better than a 19% improvement.Nobody wants price increases, but these will still fly off the shelves if the claims are true. Then the price will get lowered around the time Intel launches Rocket Lake (March 2021).
SaturnusDK - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
How do you reckon any IPC, as in Instructions *per clock*, can be from higher clocks I wonder?nandnandnand - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I didn't say that.The presentation said that the new CPUs have 26% better gaming performance vs. Zen 2. If there is a 19% improvement in IPC, then clock speeds are going up by ~6% or something like that.
Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
But on the lower-end it can make AMD not be the best value for people whose only goal is to game"Not sure that's true anymore... The results AMD have released show they hold the fps crown... How true that is we will find out in just a few weeks, but can;t see it being a lie. Even at only 50% of what they claim in IPC, they woul still take the gaming crown
Also, if you;re a gamer, you;re paying $300just for an entry 3060 class card, so noone is going to object to a $50 price hike... Just look at all those gamers lining up to give Nvidia £1,500 for a GPU that gives them a 10% increase in fps over the 50% cheaper card!
People gaming on a $500 budget are not the target market for any tech launch launching products on the bleeding edge of technological development; not AMD nor Intel nor Nvidia...
Also, see the mugs/fools that were paying $2,000 for the Intel 7980XE, as the AMD 5900X runs circles around that CPU, and is well over 60% cheaper!
supdawgwtfd - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The 5600 is NOT low end CPU...Low end would be 5100/5300.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"But on the lower-end it can make AMD not be the best value for people whose only goal is to game"These new releases are upper-mid-range at the lowest, though - the 5900X and 5950X are ultra-high-end as far as gaming is concerned. For anyone who just wants to game with decent frame-rates on a budget, they can just go ahead and buy a 3000 series CPU, and they'll have the option to replace it with a higher-end 5000 series CPU later when the price comes down.
Arbie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I keep forgetting that those last few gaming FPS are what really matter.So - if AMD has at last reached Intel in this key metric (they blew past everything else long ago) - they should charge less?
Typical attitude - it's not enough that AMD saved us from generations of milking an stagnation, and makes CPUs that are far better almost across the board. They have to be more than perfect to challenge the magnificent Intel, regardless of how degraded the latter has become and of what it did to us.
Arbie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Edit - this was supposed to be a reply to Showtime.Spunjji - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
More money for more performance seems fair. I'll be waiting for the release and reviews, then choosing between a Ryzen 5 5600X and an outgoing 3000 series.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"but those price increases along with relatively expensive B, X mobo's" Wait, what? There's one competitor - Intel. You're a butthurt Intel fan no doubt. With AMD's new 5000 series - the new gaming king has arrived and unlike Intel a new motherboard IS NOT required. Use your brain. EVeryone already knows this. AM4 400 and 500 motherboards ARE compatible as AMD announced long ago this backward compatibility. Intel - no, need new motherboard every time out to upgrade. And.... only 105W power consumption. Costing more than Intel? Are you dense. They cost less... for better performance. I suspect someone here failed in maths hard. As for RAM, regardless if you want AMD or Intel if you want faster RAM and therefore faster performance you sometimes pay for it. Although a simple comparison shows there is little cost difference from 3000 to 3600. Again, someone's an Intel fan crying and can't stand this. Fortunately... facts matter.Cooe - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
They didn't just "catch up", they appear to have an on-average gaming performance advantage of around +≈10%, or even MORE than the i9-10900K had over the R9 3950X. And absolute utter performance & efficiency DOMINANCE everywhere else. That's EASILY worth the extra $20 to get an R9 5900X over a i9-10900K. Also more "non-X"/65W SKU's are almost surely on their way at some point. Most likely a R5 5600 at $249, with the R7 5700X at $399.stankovizz - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
and since when it's AMD's obligation to fulfill your lower price dreams?Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
As a consumer my goal is to get the best value out of my hardware. Feature-set, pricing, thermal output, and performance are all calculations that go into this calculus.For AMD's mainstream r5 we are seeing a 0% increase in performance per dollar due to higher pricing at msrp. Using 3600x retail pricing to 5600x msrp, we are seeing a DECLINE in performance per dollar. The increase in pricing counteracts the increase in performance and decrease in thermal output for me, meaning Ryzen 5000 has worse value. r5 is supposed to be a value king (think i5 750 and 2500k), but it is priced too high to do so. At $250 this would be an amazing chip, so I am disappointed by amd.
Additionally, every time a manufacturer launches a solid new architecture better than the old, we see a roughly 20% improvement in performance per dollar, see Nehalem and Sandy Bridge or (even higher on) Zen. Don't be a fanboy to try and defend moves that are bad for the consumer. We should all demand better from Intel, Amd, and Nvidia to try to get the best value we can out of our hardware.
Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
For amd examples of Ryzen being a value king, see r5 1600, 1600af, 2600, and 3600.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
These are the X versions of the chips - they're not meant to be the "value king". The non-X variants will follow later, and if you care most about performance per dollar then you'll wait.All of your examples of great value are chips that came out long after the initial release and/or dropped in price significantly after launch. You're comparing fresh apples to stale oranges.
AnarchoPrimitiv - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Wait, wait, wait... Nehalem to dandy bridge was 7+ years ago, since then Intel hasn't had ANYTHING close to 20%+ performance increase generation to generationImpulses - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
I think the impact of the price increases might be overstated or felt more by those who've been following things closely, whereas it might fly under the radar for many who just get drawn in by the prospect of next gen stuff and AMD finally catching up on IPC.I'm probably somewhere in the middle, but I'm not gonna lie, my i5 6700K is getting long in the tooth and I couldn't care less whether a 5800X or 5900X is $50 more or less than it "should be", it's looking mighty appealing either way.
igor velky - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Wooo!1. AMDs DDR4 vs INTELs DDR5, dead on launch.
2. ! Single digit ! percentage gains VS CURRENT comparable INTEL cpus? Dead on launch.
3. 12 core AMD cpu has 15 % better performance then 10 core(20% less cores) CURRENT INTEL cpu. Dead on launch
I liked Roberts shoes, tho.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Intel don't have a DDR5 chip on desktop and there isn't one coming within the next year.The increases are around 15%, *and at lower power*.
The final comparison is *single core performance*, so you'll be looking at 30-40% performance advantage overall in applications that use all cores.
Your comment was Dead On Post.
hugomax - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
@Spunjji your comment was Dead on Post, because there is no AMD with integrated GPU5 Watt TDP for GPU(!)
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
...what? I'd love to know what that has to do with my post, or with Igor's being garbage.liquid_c - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
That’s if all the cores can boost to the specified frequencies. Which i’ll bet you they won’t.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Nice motte-and-bailey there. I factored that into my estimate, but the fact is that it's that "igor" here was using AMD's core count advantage in an attempt to deflect from a *single-core performance advantage*, which is patently false no matter what the situation with the multiple cores.The problem you just stated applies equally to both AMD and Intel too, so 🤷♂️
bassof - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Looks promising...now they just has to fix all the blue screens in AMD hardware.AnarchoPrimitiv - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
What are you talking about... I'm sure you're another one of those people who complain about AMD drivers while never owning AMD hardwareSpunjji - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
"...and now you'll see that I have moved the goalposts are over here. Don't forget to get distracted by this bugaboo on the way."leexgx - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
way to comments to read, min thing i am looking at is the single CCX design as that alone should remove the latency gap that you have with the 2x4 core setup of thhe 1000-3000 cpus when the process has to use the other 4 coresas the L3 Cache is not shareable and has to do a L3 copy to keep cache in sync, the 8 core CPUs wont have to do this and on the 12-16 core parts there only be 2 ccx groups not 4 so they have lower latency as well on top of having 32MB L3 cache available total, not 64MB as that is shared
5j3rul3 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Rip Intel🤩🤩🤩JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You do realise that that comment will definitely attract the ire of fanboys of both Intel and AMD and that you will be single handedly starting a war in the comments, right?Hifihedgehog - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Of course, you know this means war!JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Sigh..... Now the neutral's are also probably gonna burn as well, well someone please draft a peace treaty for the war that is to comekrazyfrog - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
This is honestly the only level of discourse the PC and gaming community is capable of.Leeea - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
There are no neutrals. Neutral actions implicitly support the status que of whoever controls them. Fools who attempt neutrality end up collateral damage. You are either with us or against us.Choose! What will it be?
Intel? Amd? Nvidia? Apple? RISC-V?
If you do not relocate to an armed camp immediately you will be easy meat for roving bands are partisans.
JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
How about looking at both sides and making an educated decision?Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You've never seen a social media site before then?Leeea - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I see we are in agreement, and you have made the educated decision to join the my side! The correct side. You see we have god, science, and education on our side! and flamers. Lots of flamers.So before we launch our attack to genocide the enemy, we need to gather resources. There are some folks over their trying figure things out. Lets wipe them out and take their stuff while they are still confused.
Lord of the Bored - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I cast my lot with Sparc!...
Wait, no one makes Sparo anymore...
Tams80 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
5th of November release? Just happens to be Bonfire Night/Guy Fawkes night in the UK...Bonfire of Intel CPUs.
Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
lolShowtime - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Price cuts 1st? Not like Intel can't afford it since they've been getting their prices for a decade now. Many people will still grab an equal Intel CPU/mobo if it's less than the new AMD's. I could go either way on my next build.nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD raising its launch prices decreases pressure on Intel to lower their own prices.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"AMD raising its launch prices decreases pressure on Intel to lower their own prices." - wrong.AM4 socket still applies. AMD already has the better price performance across the board with any competing CPU from $88 to $250 with the 3000 series. WHat AMD did not have was the gaming performance crown. Now they do. Yes, they jumped the 5000 series $50. Still cheaper than the competition. Or maybe people would rather pay over $1000 for Intel's best 10900 series which is slower.
You be the judge.
This is a slam dunk win by AMD. Same socket with AM4. Better performance for price in real world applications. Better performance AND price for single core aps and/or gaming.
Intel, like AMD, will survive being in 2nd place (obviously... Intel is a tech giant with their hand in soooo many tech baskets) - but the CPU king is AMD.
igor velky - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
https://www.anandtech.com/comments/16148/amd-ryzen...Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Posting a link to your own rubbish comment doesn't make it any less rubbish.JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Wow, did not expect this.....Intel might have to put a lot of effort to retake it's crown.arayoflight - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Eh, I'm sure Intel is still faster at real world benchmarks like PDF opening and PowerPoint presentation slides per second.JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Probably best to wait until rocket lakeKung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Tech changes faster than anything. Today is not tomorrow or yesterday. If you buy today... you buy what's best for today with considerations for tomorrow. That being said... a true Intel fan might want to wait for Intel's next offering. And they might be dissappointed with Intel's ongoing fab problems with 14nm and opening up with issues they're having with 10nm too. Or, you could wait for AMD to hit 5nm with their next up. Or you could wait 5 or 10 or 20 years and laugh at ALL of today's CPUs THEN! Reminds me of the Ostrich Effect... sticking head in sand. Too bad it doesn't make today go away (or tomorrow). AMD is the new king. Open your eyes and face the reality.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You're sure? Sounds like faith. You know... that thing without evidence. AMD already had the multi core. Now they've got single and gaming.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
If you don't want to look like a rabid fanboy, perhaps don't jump at someone posting an obvious joke comment? Seriously, do you think they honestly believe that "PowerPoint presentation slides per second" is a real-world benchmark? It's a joke about the lengths Intel will go to to show "performance leadership".Showtime - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Intel doesn't currently have any way of retaking the crown if this is accurate. They will have to increase clocks, and power (heat) to try match AMD in gaming, but AMD will be more efficient, and do most everything else noticeably better.JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Not being a fanboy here but I have to ask, what if they use their new 10nm process?Nicon0s - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
By the time Intel will have +10 core 10nm desktop processors AMD will be close to 5nm anyway.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Indeed. It's like asking a question - 'well what if Intel uses their time machine and just starts using their technology from the year 2030?" - They will blow AMD out of the water. Oddly enough physics and reality doesn't quite work that way.nicamarvin - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You mean Their 10nm Desktop CPU that will be released on 2021 that has a 5% IPC disadvantage and is capped at 8 cores? Intel can't compete with ZEN 3 until 2022 and... by that time they would be fighting against yet another beast 5nm ZEN 4drothgery - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Erm... Rocket Lake (the one rumored to be capped at 8 cores) is Willow Cove backported to 14nm and Intel is claiming a March 2021 launch for that.Adler Lake (Intel's first 10nm desktop part) is rumored to top out at 8 Golden Cove + 8 Gracemont and launch in H2 2021 (which probably means Q4).
Showtime - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Well it would be more efficient which helps with everything, but you can only speculate at this point. AMD has made a significant jump, and Intel can't do anything just yet. They have been behind schedule, and are now firmly behind the 8 ball. This won't destroy Intel just like Intels dominance over AMD for a decade didn't destroy AMD. Intel will sell lots of chips for a long time, and aren't going anywhere, but they don't have any real advantage for gamers if this info is accurate.Quantumz0d - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
10nm is useless now, it needs more refinement. 14nm++ vs 7nm is what we have the comedy is AMD is finally catching upto Intel.Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
10 nm superfin is shipping in high volume products at 4.8 Ghz, and according to Intel engineers can clock even higher. It has roughly a 5% frequency deficit, which can easily be overcome through microarchitectural tweaks that boost ipc, or a new microarchitecture dramatically boosting ipc. Intel's 10nm woes are effectively over, now it is simply a matter of building more capacity. 7nm on the other hand, is delayed and underperforming by ~ 12 months, and 7nm products have been delayed by ~ 6months.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
1) Define "high volume".2) If it can clock higher, why isn't it?
3) 5% *IPC* deficit.
4) "easily overcome" vs. "new microarchitecture" - pick one, they can't both be true.
5) If their woes are over, why does their best quad-core 10nm++ chip need 50W at boost? Why aren't there any of the 8-core chips out? Why is availability still so low?
6) If 7nm is delayed by 12 months, how are products only delayed by 6?
Just a big old load of 🤪🥴 from you.
mdriftmeyer - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
There's not a single friend of mine who work at Intel would agree with anything you just wrote, Otritus. They know they have nothing to compete currently, and won't when Zen 4 arrives. By then Zen 5, 6 and 7 designs will be deep in design.nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Rocket Lake will have higher IPC than Comet Lake. But it might only be enough to tie Zen 3.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
If these figures are accurate then the IPC of the cores in Rocket Lake is still ~5% lower than Zen 3. We have no idea how high they'll be able to clock it, but it's an absolute guarantee that it will draw more power at ~4.8Ghz and they'll only go up to 8 cores. They'll have to price it low to compete, but the die size will be comparatively huge... Not a good spot for Intel to be in.Hifihedgehog - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
They certainly will. Tiger Lake at 4.8 GHz single core nets just 595 and that is while being fed 50W while in boost for just a quad-core. There is a definite IPC deficit (-5-6% less than Zen 3) on Intel's side of the court even with Intel's latest and greatest Tiger Lake. Even with the expected 5.0 GHz boost for Willow Cove in Rocket Lake in March 2021, they would be lagging at 620 points in Cinebench compared to the 5900X's 631. And that's not even bringing up the 5950X's 640+ score.Otritus - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Just remember that different applications tax processors differently, so you'll need a wider range of tasks to accurately determine ipc. It is why intel gets away with saying they are better at gaming and "real-world tasks" (tasks that care more about frequency than ipc), and includes AVX-512 for that AI boost that every gamer is clamoring for /s.But there certainly seems to be a general ipc deficit on intel, and with amd traditionally doing better in tasks related video rendering and encoding, we'll probably see them really run up their lead in productivity suites. Kudos to amd for retaking the ipc crown for the first time since sunny cove dethroned zen 2.
erinadreno - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Had to say not a big fan of raising the price when the only benefit is better at gaming. I'd expect they do more when they say "changed the cache topology". AMD might reach some bottleneck, but nevertheless, still good effortcharlesg - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Is gaming really the only benefit? Maybe I missed something. Seems more processing power is good all around.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You missed nothing. Gaming is a benchmark in this sense. AMD already had simpler real world application leads across the price/performance band and in multi-core usage. The market still saw Intel winning due the gaming edge for single/dual/quad core usage which games make more use of. Thus, today AMD announces and stresses this is no longer the case and AMD now also rules this gaming roost. It could not be more obvious to those in tech news and hardware fans why this facet of CPU competition is stressed in marketing as we see.nicamarvin - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Only Benefit Is Gaming? how about 19% IPC in Rendering?erinadreno - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Seems pretty vague to me. If I remember correctly, the gcc compilation improvement is single digit. The Adobe stuff seems not only related to IPC but their software. I bet others like Matlab or python scripts will also be marginally betterArbie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If AMD doesn't meet your value standards, buy Intel. Competition is great.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Only Benefit Is Gaming? how about 19% IPC in Rendering"If only! Adobe was on one slide, shown briefly in passing. I think it said an 11% increase in performance over the 3950X. But abode is such a niche case. I and all the video editors I know (weddings etc). use MKV, (to add in srt subtitles, multi-layered audio tracks, thumbnails etc.) and Adobe doesn't support mkv.
Trying to find any website/You Tuber that posts rendering benchmarks in Handbrake etc. is really hard. Still no 3090/3080 handbrake HEVC (level 5.1) benchmarks anywhere, and what we're now a month after launch?
I have a 3950X, but the IPC seems too small for me to upgrade in this release cycle, but then again I'm guessing as no benchmarks!
hbsource - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Agree. I went 1800X to 3950 and it was basically x2 rendering performance increase.I think I'll sit this one out until the next socket.
Otritus - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
IPC is not a consistent improvement across applications. If it was the 9900k would not have held the gaming crown over the 3800x. That 19% general improvement could be 30% in rendering, or 5% in rendering. The point is we dont know, but a 15 to 25 percent improvement can definitely be expected.ingwe - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The one marketing slide with the list of metrics where AMD is the leader made me chuckle for whatever reason.Exciting results though. More healthy competition is always better.
JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Competition is always good for the consumer. ( Except I really didn't like them raising the prices a bit)Duckeenie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
That's the problem. They don't really compete on price at all, they just slot their stuff into the pricing slot that best reflects their performance.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
They don't really compete on price at all" Eh?Intel 10700K, 8 core CPU - $451 (converted from actual Amazon UK today) - TDP 229 Watts (peak for 5 Ghz, 250+ Watts for 5.1 Ghz))
AMD 5800X - 8 core CPU - $449 - TDP 129 Watts (peak - using both PBO 11 & PBO 2, assuming similar to 3800x)
So that's the same price for a faster AMD CPU that will use 50% less electricity, and reduce your AC needs in summer by a similar amount as you won't need to move all that hot air from your home......
But wait, can you get a 10700K? No, its vaporware! Amazon UK suggest delivery by 4th November, maybe!
So comparison is more like:
9700K - 8 core, $400+ no hyper-threading, a motherboard platform that is already declared EOL by Intel, and a TDP of ???
Man, stop shilling!
Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You forgot some of the i9- 10900 series from Intel which can run over $1000 - Cascade Lake $630 and up to $1300.Otritus - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
By amd's own admission that 105 watt tdp processors will pull up to 142 watts not 129. So the 5800x has only an 87 vs 100 watt lead. I really do wish manufactures would market tdp based on max power draw because we know coolers rated for the default tdp is leaving performance on the table without tweaking.SaturnusDK - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Since AMD claims 24% performance per watt improvement and claim 26% performance improvement it's a safe bet to say that the power consumption will be almost exactly the same as the 3000 series.So that means we can just go back to the Anandtech review and see that the 5900X/5950X will consume about 120W during stress test, and 142W peak. And the 5600X/5800X will consume about 75W during stress tests, and 92W peak.
Gaming is not a peak load test for any Ryzen CPU so expect the stress test average (120W/75W) from the Anandtech review of the 3000 series CPU to be almost exactly what we'll see with the 5000 series.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
It's always funny when companies do lists that are basically "a list where we win".It's like the Intel Thunderbolt 4 checklists that are 90% "is Thunderbolt 4".
Orkiton - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
gimme, gimme the "reviews"! What date, launch time?Orkiton - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I can see ppl @ Intel cold sweating right now 😂Eulytaur - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The $50 increase for price and the -100MHz base clock across the board is strange, would this perhaps have anything to do with switching to 8 cores vs 4?The absence of the 5700X and the 5600 are also strange. Would they come later or will they not be launched this generation so the 3600 and 3700X could coexist with the 5000 series?
nicamarvin - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
$50 Increase for about 20% IPC, I call that a winShowtime - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
No, not really. They have been raising prices every gen, and even their mobo's no longer have a real mid range with relatively expensive mobo's. Hopefully Intel will have sales now, and that will force AMD to lower prices a bit. We all know that whatever the gaming claims are, at 1440p+, it's only a few FPS in most situations.Kung Fu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
$75 dollar for an AM4 socket motherboard which can use the 5000 series is "no mid range"? I mean, true, 70 bucks is typically referred to as entry level but wtf are you babbling? I mean, you do realize this is not some political argument where emotions and 'feels' mean anything, right? That's the nice thing about tech news - everyone is a click away from facts. The options for AMDs 5000 series are the same as for their 3000s (and some of the 1000s and 2000s). AM4 socket has served for a long, long time - saving heaps for millions. No socket lasts forever (just ask Intel which switches far more over the past couple decades). That, and they've got offerings for rich and poor and everyone between. All bases are covered for AMD. Facts are cool. Try them! :)liquid_c - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
You write about facts and then suggest a 75$ MB to go with a 500$ CPU? You’re fucking retarded and i had just about enough of you AMD hornets. Go enjoy whatever the fuck makes you happy and stop behaving like you have a clue. Because you obviously don’t.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Someone seems irrationally invested in this. The claim was that AMD have "no mid range" motherboards, it was demonstrated to be hilariously false, you just moved the goalposts.Proving once more that people who use the r word to insult the intelligence of others are just projecting.
Qasar - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
one store i go to for comp hardware has 40 boards that are $200 CDN or less. i would say thats a good range for low end to midrange. would most on here pit a $500 cpu in one of those ? probably not, but the fact is still there, amd does have boards that would fit the mid range group.Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If it turns out that each of the CPUs offers the "best gaming performance" in its class, they can afford to charge a further premium for that bragging right alone. At least for a couple of months, until Intel responds with Rocket Lake, or AMD makes pre-emptive price cuts just before that.Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Having +$50 prices to start off, they can reduce them -$50 just before Rocket Lake launches.- Collect higher revenue per CPU for 3 months
- End up at the same price points as 3000 series
- Look like the better value by the time Rocket Lake is reviewed.
⇒ Win-win-win.
bugnguts - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I think you are spot on HuI8, $50 drop before Rocket just makes too much since.Otritus - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Remember 3000 series was unofficially price cut below msrp, so 5000 series is not great on the value front. Your win-win-win proposition is correct from the perspective of AMD, but as a consumer it reduces the value that I am receiving.Considering how amd has cut prices before every major intel launch, and intel already planning on delivering worse perf/dollar to the pre price-cut amd processors, I wonder if Intel is going to jebait AMD this time around because they have been completely toppled from the top of the market.
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It really isn't a win, at least on the lower-end models. $50 is 20% of the MSRP of a 3600X.Thus, the new entry-model 5600X is 20% more expensive than a 3600X was on its release, and 50% more expensive than the 3600 was. That seems a lot for 20% more performance generation on generation, specially given it has been more than a year since those two CPUs were released.
The 5600X's MSRP, as a matter of fact, is closer to the i7-10700KF's price than to the i5-10600KF's. And the 10700KF is $100 cheaper than the 5800X.
All of that for near identical gaming performance (a 7% lead is small, specially once you factor that was comparing a 12-core AMD CPU to a 10-core Intel part).
I don't think that there is much justification for such a price hike on the lower-end, where productivity matters less and additional $50 hurts more.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Interesting to see multiple accounts posting this exact same narrative 🤔 Is it performance leadership, or is it not? After all, that mattered when Intel had it and then now... it doesn't.Otritus - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
At the msrp of the 3600x, the 5600x's 19% ipc improvement has an actual Decline in perf/dollar. Using the street pricing of the 3600x, this effect is even more pronounced. I wish for a return to the old days when new architectures would boost performance and performance per dollar by 15 to 30 percent. And with the 10600k being the cheapest chip that doesnt really leave gaming performance on the table, this 299 msrp doesn't change that (300 vs 280 dollars). At an msrp of $249 the 5600x would be great value (and the cheapest "best" gaming chip), and at $219 it would be an absolute steal.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
> Buy 3600 on sale> Wait 6-12 months
> Upgrade with 5600X at the price you want
> Sell 3600
> Win
Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Obviously AMD wants to upsell the higher priced parts first to enthusiast early adopters. E.g. by most reviewers' account, the 3600X was a waste of money compared to 3600, 3800X compared to 3700X.If the lower SKUs are on the way (likely), they'll come 2 months later, or something.
Not having those budget-oriented options in the in-between price brackets may also help to temporarily bolster pricing on the 3000 series parts - less need of drastic price cuts for now.
sing_electric - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
This. There's also an obvious 5700(X)-sized gap in the chips they announced today; though I'm not sure exactly how they'll fill it - maybe 8 core, split across 2 CCX - more L3 cache (though it wouldn't surprise me if some of it was disabled, either for perf reasons or to allow use of chips where there were lithography problems there) which helps with some workloads but hurts in others? It'd let them use dies with problems in up to 50% of the cores and probably make more money than they would selling the same chip as part of a Ryzen 3 part.haukionkannel - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Many ways to cut 5700x... reduce clockspeeds and use 65w power seiling. Reduce cache! And still have that 8 core 16 threaths!realbabilu - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Cooling fan upgraded?erinadreno - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
even better, you don't get oneRickITA - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Wraith stealth (5600x) should be worst than wraith prism (3700x).Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Yeah, that's disappointing. The Wraith Stealth is pretty crap. Not *quite* Intel stock-cooler level of bad, but not good either.RickITA - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
So what's better, a 3700X or a 5600X? Same price, same TDP.nicamarvin - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Same MT performance but much better at gamingHul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Disregard the manufacturer TDP values. They're fudged from an equation with arbitrary values plugged in, and mean very little. The most you can do is take them as a hint for what the intended use case is (high powered desktop versus mainstream desktop).Refer to 3rd party reviews for power consumption and cooling requirements instead.
SaturnusDK - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
For 12 and 16 core part you can generally expect the actual power consumption to be about 120W during stress tests. AMD claimed a 24% performance per watt improvement, and a similar performance uplift so power consumption should be the exact same as previous generation.Same is true for the 6 and 8 core parts so expect the same 75W power consumption during stress test as the 3000 series.
Arbie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You're talking about Intel. My "105W" TDP Ryzen 3900X uses 115W at 100% real-world load. That's 24 threads at 4GHz. Close enough.Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
No, I'm talking about AMD.Gamers Nexus did a piece last fall on the AMD TDP and the equation that they use to derive the value. (Or really: The equation where by messing around with the input values, they get out the TDP they wanted all along.) (Search for: "gamers nexus ryzen tdp deep-dive".)
TDP (Watts) = (tCase°C - tAmbient°C)/(HSF θca)
It involves choosing ambient and operating temperatures and a theta value that represents the thermal resistance of the cooling setup (lower is better).
You can either read the article, or watch the video with the same content on YouTube.
Power limits applied using operation are separate from the TDP (although usually aligned with it more or less closely). TDP is meant to signal the cooling requirements, as per the term "Thermal Design Power".
Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
*during operation (instead of "using operation")SaturnusDK - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
No offense to Steve but his piece was and is quite irrelevant. The 3900X uses about 120W during stress testing (142W peak), and the 3700X uses about 75W during stress testing (92W peak). Those are the numbers from Anandtech review, you know the page you're actually commenting on here. The 5900X and 5800X will match that almost exactly. If anything it'll be slightly lower, not higher.ahenriquedsj - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
My consumption dream is without a doubt the 5900X.SirMaster - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
But then you don't get 8 core CCX, only 6 core.Hul8 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
There are benefits and drawbacks in both (besides the obvious core and thread count differences):5900X:
(+) 2x total L3 cache (+32MB) (but still only 32MB accessible by each core)
(+) lower core density per area ⇒ lower heat density ⇒ potentially higher clocks under load
(+) higher maximum boost frequency (+100MHz)
(+) average or better than average silicon (of the lot that has 6 - 7 intact cores) ⇒ better frequency, frequency/voltage and frequency/power characteristics
(+) double the total bandwidth to and from the I/O die (and by extension, system memory) (the bandwidth for an individual core is still the same)
5800X:
(+) higher base frequency (+100MHz)
(+) lower average core-to-core latency if a task with many threads would end up split across dies on the 5900X (if task requires or benefits from more than 16 threads, this becomes largely moot point)
(-) will use lower quality silicon (of the lot that still has all 8 cores intact) (the uses for even lower quality ones would be limited to lower priced 8-cores ("5800", "5700X" or "5700"), or maybe budget 6 or 4-core CPUs for the worst)
(+) lower price
All together, if your priorities lie solely in gaming, video consumption and light productivity tasks (social media), 5800X will be plenty. I don't think the 5900X will be worse, though - it's different but also more expensive.
velanapontinha - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"You should expect to see our analysis as part of our launch day reviews on November 5th" - unless do an Ampere kind of review...Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Their CPU reviewer isn't likely to be dealing with half their state being on fire.hansip87 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Well it will go pricier and definitely will kick prev gen prices and Intel 10th gen prices down. As 10400f user, I can't wait to get 10700f at bargain price.JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Haha well that's what I'd probably do..........if I were to build a pc anytime soon.............maybe.........Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Good luck with that - Intel don't have the best record for reducing existing prices. They tend to just release "new" CPUs that require a "new" motherboard and chipset and reduce the prices on those.halcyon - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Any news/comments on all-core max frequencies for various models?donquixote42 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
> AMD expects that the Ryzen 7 5800X, at $449, is likely to be competing against Intel's Core i7-10700KIt also directly competes with 3900X which is priced at $440 right now. I assume 3900X still beats 5800X on multi-threaded office workloads.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Should do, yup. Nice choice to have - solid performance for office or gaming at the same price, or spend a bit more and get more of both.ManuelDiego - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Any word on 1st gen chipsets (B350 / X370) supporting Zen 3?JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
None that I've heard but highly unlikelytechxx - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Already confirmed long ago that only 400 and 500 chipsets will support Zen 3.Stochastic - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It's hard not to be disappointed by the pricing, but I suppose I should have expected this. Hopefully in another year, Intel will be able to exert enough competitive pressure to drive these prices more in line with the 3000 series.Stochastic - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Also, the next-gen consoles are looking like really good deals. Much more compelling perf/$ than PCs IMO.evilspoons - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Too bad Blender doesn't work on the PS5 😂Quantumz0d - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Yeah why not, how about we play old titles ? PS5 says PSN is all you have. Xbox on the otherhand has some advantage on that, and PC is not just a gaming machine. It's a Computer.nicamarvin - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Really? Before Ryzen Intel was charging $1000 for a 8 Core Processor, you should thank Amd for lowering prices so Peasants like you can get their hands on a 8 Core Desktop CPUJfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Well, pressure can work both waysGio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If you keep pandering to AMD increasing prices generation over generation, it's going to become the new Intel/ Nvidia, selling overpriced parts.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
SO you're saying that when Intel were selling CPUs for $2,000 you thought that was okay (No trace of any complaints from you at the time, or since)But if AMD charges 60% less, whilst providing 40%+ more IPC, (5950X vs 7980XE), that's not okay?
Shilling, or just an Intel employee?
Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It wasn't okay. Intel's milking was much much worse. I used to complain about it. But I just created this account today, LMAO.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
PSA: Using the word "peasant" in your post makes you look like a total jerk.alexdi - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Not keen on the price increases accompanying a lower base clock and no cooler. Intel's been milking the market for years with exorbitant pricing on higher-core products. The appeal of Ryzen was that it put the brakes on this, and we finally got to stick it Intel for bilking us for so long. (The 50% price drop in the i9s the moment competition appeared was particularly offensive/hilarious.) But now we've got an 8-core chip at $450? It wasn't long ago that the 2700X was $160 at retail. Even today, a 3800X is $350. Just because Intel decided 8 cores was so premium to merit $500 doesn't mean AMD should follow their example.dullard - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Both companies are known to price gouge when they have a good product. This isn't AMD's first time beating Intel. Last time AMD had desktop chips in the $1300 range.Notagaintoday - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Which was $700 cheaper than Intel's 7980XE!Where are your complaints about the 7980XE I wonder?
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Dude, stop opening up on people who don't disagree with you.dullard - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
$1299 desktop chips when AMD had the clear lead. https://www.zdnet.com/article/its-official-amd-hit...Two companies is not competition. Pricing in a duopoly does not work how you would want it to work.
JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Well except that this might soon turn into a triopoly (if that's a word) with armArbie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Why don't you compare the price / performance of these Ryzens to where we'd be with Intel alone? Then you'll get the real picture.And BTW AMD still needs every cent it can get. They'd be crazy to undercharge for premium products.
0siris - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If AMD charges the same prices as Intel, what does it matter if AMD has caught up to Intel? Now you're just getting double teamed instead of getting raped by Intel alone.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"It wasn't long ago that the 2700X was $160 at retail"Not at launch, it wasn't. 🙄
fred666 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It's funny how they artificially limit the 1 thread turbo frequency on low end parts, to ensure that higher end parts with a lot more cores can perform better in games. Otherwise, they'd be identical.Random username - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Have you ever hear about a thing called binning?JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Not intending to start a war and out of a genuine curiousity, did anyone else notice that they used an Nvidia 2080ti for their testing? I would've expected them to use a Radeon...Bik - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
They used the highest performant graphic card now that they don't want to show their hand with big navi yet. 5700xt would make new processor looks bad.CrystalCowboy - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Using the fastest available graphics card emphasizes the CPU dependency, which is what they want to brag up.sing_electric - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD's got to be pretty confident in their performance claims with the MSRP they're putting out there. With Zen/Zen+/Zen 2, the deal was more cores + bundled cooler for the money (offset somewhat by higher motherboard pricing).Now they're asking slightly more than Intel's 10th gen parts, and they don't throw in a cooler (above the 5600X, that is). Frankly, even if the 20% IPC uplift holds, there's going to be a lot of situations where it makes sense to get a Zen 2 part, particularly if there's reasonable discounts (Zen+ sometimes could be had for ~50% off after Zen 2 launched; I doubt that'll happen here but even at 30% off you could go a model "up" and get similar perf in some benchmarks at a lower cost.)
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I think that's the idea. They give retailers a chance to drain down old stock at non-bargain-basement prices before they fill out the range with the second-tier chiplets.JayNor - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
So, connect lpddr5 to Tiger Lake. Then what?JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Ummmm that's a mobile chip...........This is desktop
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Then you still have a quad-core laptop with 4 PCIe 4.0 lanes. 🤷♂️RickiTicki - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Does anyone know if the Ryzen 7 2700X will work with B550 motherboards? It seems like this is a best buy right now, but I want to buy a B550 motherboard. Thankssing_electric - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Look at the box for 'Zen+' support, but I think AMD's said B550 is Zen 2/3 only. X570 does support Zen+ (2700X, etc.)JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It probably won't, forward compatibility is very rare on most productsphoenix_rizzen - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
https://www.amd.com/en/chipsets/b550Officially supports Ryzen 3000 and 5000 CPUs.
I think there might be a motherboard maker that supports 2000 series but don't quote me on that. :)
dicobalt - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Going from a 2500K to a 5600XJfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If I were you I'd probably wait to see what Intel dies with rocket lake. That being said if you needed to upgrade by the end of November then sure go aheadJfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
*does not diesSaturnusDK - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
dies was accurate :Dnicamarvin - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Rocket Lake has no hope of competing, Amd has a clear lead on IPC on a 10nm Willow Cove CPu, Rocket Lake is 14nm and lesser core than Willow CoveJfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Well once you factor in clock speeds, those clock speeds might infact compensate for the lower ipcSpunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
They'd have to go above 5Ghz - they could barely do that with Skylake, and it doesn't look like their new cores clock that high (though we've only seen them on 10nm+ / ++). They're also larger and thirstier, so even if they can hit the speeds needed to beat AMD on 14nm+++++, they'll be doing it with *obscene* power draw.I647 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Sure but that's in March 2021. Then you'll have to wait to see what AMD does with Zen 4 in Q4 2021 rinse repeat. You have to buy at some point.JfromImaginstuff - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Ok that is a valid pointahenriquedsj - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
This craziest thing is you can slap it in the old B450 board, it's the same as I would replace 7600k with 10600kHighTech4US - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I am waiting for the NON-X processors like a 5600 to replace the 3600. All the X does is increase the price as you can currently overclock a 3600 to a 3600X. Same with the 3700 to 3700X.Also the NON-X processors are much better priced.
Bik - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Like what you said, market price for 3600 and 3600x is about the same at the moment after people realized they dont need the xsatai - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Can we get threadrippers too? Preferably with a wider ECC support.SaturnusDK - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Threadripper has always trailed the desktop line up by 2-3 months so expect the same this time.porina - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
8 core is in a tricky place. Article mentioned 3700X as best selling, but then mentions an MSRP increase which seems to be based off the 3800X. The price delta from 3700X is much bigger given the absence of 5700X at this time. I want an 8 core, but I don't want the 5800X price or power.Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The performance seems very good on the high-end, but I really think that the price hike hurts the value proposition of the cheaper models (5600X and the 5800X).The 5900X has two more cores than the 10900K and its gaming lead is still just 7%. So I guess that a 8-core 5800X will have almost zero advantage, gaming-wise, over a 8-core 10700KF, and the same goes true for the 5600X vs. the 10600KF.
The 10700KF retails for $349. That's $100 less than the 5800X's MSRP and just $50 more than the 6-core 5600X's MSRP. The 5600X will cost $60 more than the equivalent 10600KF. All of that cash for an almost null gaming advantage?
On the higher-end models, such as the 5900X and the 5950X, AMD has no real competition and the $50 hike is less significant, proportionally. Also, productivity matters more and, on that regard, AMD's lead is insane, both on multi and single-core performance.
But on lower-end, gaming focused builds... Intel will offer the same gaming performance for 20% less money. It's a shame for AMD to lose that crown. It can't even rely on the argument that it's platform has better upgradeability since it's the last refresh on AM4.
I think AMD can end up losing some of its DIY sales leadership for such a small mistake.
Bik - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I don't understand that either, +50$ accross the range doesn't make sense. 20% more for the affordable 3600x options and 10% for high end 3900x? Nvidia charges two times the price of RTX 3080 for a 3090 that is 15% faster as dismissing return would be. Is this 'increasing return' in AMD case?Gio97BR - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I thought the same thing about the "increasing returns". The 5900X seems like the better value, the 5800X the worst one.5600X - $300 - 6 cores - $50 per core
5800X - $450 - 8 cores - $56 per core
5900X - $550 - 12 cores - $45 per core
5950X - $800 - 16 cores - $50 per core
I don't know if they are trying to push people into the more powerful and (expensive) parts, but the cheaper ones are just oddly priced with that linear $50 increase.
guycoder - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Each processor has a fixed cost for the I/O Die + packaging. A working 8 core die is more valuable than a 6 core which (probably) contains defective cores. Try running the math again but assume something like $50 retail to cover the fixed costs.CiccioB - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
RTX3090 does not offer only more cores than RTX3080, but much more.24GB of memory and NVlink allow this board to be used for professional usage, something 3080 cannot.
It's a different product completely, not just a "bit faster one". If you buy a 3090 for +15% in gaming you are wasting those 85% more than it can give you with professional programs. And doubling the crunching power when paired with another one for content creation.
It's up to you (and your pocket) to decide if it is a good option.
But comparing a 3090 to a 3080 just for gaming and saying it is a overpriced product indicates a lack of understanding.
Kjella - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Nvidia gimped it in a few significant ways though... FP16 w/FP32 accumulation is 1:2 ratio vs 1:1 on the old RTX Titan, so not nearly as good for deep learning as it could have been. Also no pro drivers where that matters. Where it shines is rendering like Blender, video editing with lots of layers etc. but it really is an overgrown Geforce card. When they launch the RTX 3080 20GB version it'll be 85% of a RTX 3090 in pretty much every respect.CiccioB - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
And it will not have NVlink...Two products for different usages, though you can waste your money for gaming on a 3090.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"The 5900X has two more cores than the 10900K and its gaming lead is still just 7%. So I guess that a 8-core 5800X will have almost zero advantage, gaming-wise, over a 8-core 10700KF"Why? The 10900K has higher boost clocks than the 10700KF, and the vast majority of games don't scale past 6 cores. Seems to me like you're making inaccurate inferences to draw incorrect conclusions.
AnarchoPrimitiv - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
The extra two cores have NOTHING to do with the 5900x's lead over Intel, did you watch the presentation? AMD's single thread/single core performance is now better than Intel's, especially at gaming.ruxandy - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
"Anand once said a very insightful phrase to me - There are no bad products, only bad prices.” - Man, I've been reading articles on Anandtech for the past 22 years. This genuinely brought a tear to my eye.fotcorn - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I am a game middleware developer and would be very interested in some C++ build benchmarks. Unreal Engine, CryEngine, Lumberyard and Godot are all available on GitHub, so a benchmark measuring the build time of those would be very cool!ballsystemlord - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I think they're already benchmarking C++ code compilation times with chromium.yeeeeman - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Intel is officially out of the map until they release a new CPU...RobATiOyP - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Even parity on gaming means anyone who does any multi-processing should consider the AMD CPU for multi-threaded multi-core benefits.The real key is is how good are the CPU/Mobo solutions!
Soulkeeper - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The price for their top of the line CPU has gone up each zen refresh.The 1800x was below the $499 msrp quickly after launch.
It seems like the chiplet design is NOT cheaper for the consumers.
Arbie - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
AMD is charging what they can get, as they should.nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
When you're only competing with yourself, things don't get cheaper.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
The 1800X only had performance leadership in applications that could use all of the cores. So yeah, as their position has improved, so have the prices they're asking for them. That gets poured into more R&D.The alternative is that AMD keep prices low, then Intel slowly throttle them with the colossal R&D budget financed by their "friendly" (read as: captive) OEMs.
CiccioB - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Just a question: what's the meaning of adding a X suffix to all the models?Shouldn't X means something different than those that have not?
Or it is just there as X means "eXtra" and allows for a higher price?
phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Later on they'll be releasing non-X versions that will be binned CPUs with less cache or lower speeds or higher TDP.They're starting at the top and filling in downward, instead of starting at the bottom and releasing faster SKUs later.
shshsh007 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
So no APUs for retail B550 motherboard buyers?phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Just wait?shshsh007 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Why?Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
What does that have to do with this launch? 🤷♂️Tunnah - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Looks more likely the 5700X will be the 3700X comparison - the 5800X is the 3800X comparison. Check the clock speeds.5700X will come in at a price point a wee bit lower with clocks similar to the 3700X I reckon
GeoffreyA - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Very impressed with the IPC increase and can't wait for the microarchitecture article (and the review). Thanks for the coverage, Ian.CrystalCowboy - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Some of the changes in the CCX chiplets are discussed. What about the I/O die? Is it still 12nm?After the Ryzen 4xxx APUs I kind of thought they might go monolithic for the CPUs as well.
silverblue - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I hear the I/O die is unchanged, so still 12nm.ranran - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Typo: "this gets elimated completely"RandomizedCommenter - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Slightly off-topic, but is there any insight into when we might hear more about AMD's next-gen chipsets that will support DDR5 memory that will play nice with these latest processors?nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I don't think you will see Zen 3 with DDR5 at all.You will see Zen 4 on AM5 with DDR5, and you MIGHT see a Zen 3+ on AM5 with DDR5.
RandomizedCommenter - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Yikes. So we may not have a consumer-grade DDR5 AMD system until roughly the first half of 2022? *sigh* The next thing is always on the horizon.nandnandnand - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Zen 4 may come out at the very end of 2021. Intel's Alder Lake with DDR5 would also come out sometime in the second half of 2021.RandomizedCommenter - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I've been waiting since 2003 to do my next build... what's another year?JfromImaginstuff - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Exactly 😄Pinn - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Never. RAM control is in the CPU.SaturnusDK - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Nope. Not on AMD. It's in the I/O die. Rumour has it that there will be a zen3+ with a new I/O die able to run DDR5 but use the same zen3 chiplets as these just announced.silverblue - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Going from Zen 2 to Zen 3 shouldn't be too painful for a lot of people. It has the same RAM support, so will work fine with a decent kit, and memory is hardly expensive now if it becomes necessary to eke out a little bit more performance. Assuming cooling requirements haven't gotten too extreme, that old cooler could have a new lease of life. Even 400-series owners can join in, albeit only when the necessary BIOS updates are made available within a couple of months after launch (and assuming PCIe 4.0 isn't required). Given that I'm stuck with an RX 590, my 3600 is quite underutilised, so I won't be forking out for Zen 3 for at least the majority of its lifespan, but given it's a drop-in upgrade for a mature platform, some people might literally need to just buy the CPU, install it, and that's them done. We won't be able to do that with Zen 4.TheJian - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Raise prices more. 660m TTM net income is crap with 20% share of x86 vs. Intels 80% making 23.6B NET INCOME. AMD should be making 5B+ net income right now! The last time they made a billion NET INCOME quarter was Dec2009 (NVDA had 4 1B+ Q's 2018, their stock price then 240-280, ridiculous today at 3.3B TTM, should be making 8B at 550-600 or WTH??), and they haven't made a BILLION YEAR since. It is comic the share price is where they should be if they WERE making ~5-6B on that 20% market share, but instead they make PEANUTS. Because of great products with BAD PRICING. Time to up next gen $100 each especially if you make it to 5nm at TSMC before Intel. I might say 150ea (across the whole lineup, put them ON TOP of this 5000 series, not replace them!) if you use that 5nm to GROW the chip on the gpu side on some models as your share should be near 30% in 12mo if you keep making KINGS like Dirk Meyer said in 2011 when you fired him for it...LOL. You can see, you charge for KINGS, the losers get discounted from day 1.https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/...
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/...
Dec 2009 when they had that 1B+ quarter the stock was $9 (pretty much the high from 2008-2016). Shares have diluted 2x. So basically your share is worth half of that 9 if they still had that 1B QUARTER today. But today it takes them 4 quarters (TTM) to make 660mil. Now remove the fabs, most assets (old leased lands sold off to survive etc).
IE 2006, they had 13.5B assets, now just hit 6.5B 2020 (were 3B 2015! OUCH!). So terrible income vs. 2009 Q4, 1/2 assets today vs, 14yrs ago, outstanding shares doubled (that's like saying your $100 bill in your pocket is only worth 50 now!) and on and on. Quit making console crap with single digit to mid teens margins (AMD said it multiple times first gen, see no different this time), and direct that R&D to KING cpu/gpu ALWAYS. NV passed stating it robs from core R&D, so they won gpu last 7yrs since console R&D started basically right? AMD watts/heat/noise always off if perf close, and usually everything off vs. NV and lost the cpu race for that same time until recently with ryzen. Stop wasting time on console chips made for $95-110 last gen and you making $10-15. Start making reticle limit gpus and larger cpus so you can charge like NV/INTC and make NET INCOME like them too! This isn't rocket science. KINGS price like KINGS. It is a massive mistake AGAIN that AMD didn't go to reticle limit at TSMC while NV couldn't do it at samsung do to yields on 8nm (forced under 630mm^2). You could have been king, but went stupid again. No raising prices for you on that small shat that will be discounted from day 1 vs. nvda. You should have upped the bandwidth (256/384busses) and went to 800mm^2+ and CHARGED for it. Instead your new gpus already 2nd rate, slow mem, slow bus, low bandwidth, small, shenanigans to make up for it being explained right and left. 192bit for a flagship in 2020 with GDDR6? When you design a loser, expect loser pricing. With 256/384bit and a reticle limit you'd be winning everything at 1080p and laughing about $100 more than NV's 3090 price tag and calling it a bargain as you smoked them with 800mm^2 on a arguably BETTER 7nm TSMC vs. Sammy 8n yield issue process right?
Again, make some better moves Lisa Su, who made 59mil for 660mil NET INCOME for the last 12 months. Shareholders should be asking her why she isn't making 6B NET INCOME for AMD at that wage. See other CEO's. Intel for example 23.6B Swan made 66mil. Uh, that don't look so good for Lisa right? Intel's ceo barely beating her but like, 50x NET INCOME for company. He's earning it, she's...Well they're going in the right direction, but the stock should be $2-4 at 660mil. I just proved it. There is far more stats, look at 15yrs of data there at macrotrends. Nobody should be whining about AMD charging more for a winning cpu, and if they don't the stock deserves a massive tanking back to 2008-2016 prices for all the reasons above. Someone explain this math to me for today's share price. Is AMD hiding billions of net income yearly somewhere? Is there a single stat that is better than a decade ago? Net income wise, since 2008 it looks like roughly 8B in losses. Add up all 15yrs, I can't bother, a quick look shows 2x 3.3B losses, a 1.2B loss, many ~500mil losses that eat any 500mil gain year. Again, making 660mil TTM (trailing twelve months) is worth more today why? When will they make 6B NET INCOME? 10x 2009 income, would be 10x 2009 share price (discount 2x dilution etc...ROFL), so maybe $80 if you magically were making 6B today and magically bought back 1/2 your shares by 4pm today ;) I could keep going...Sell AMD lunatics. Buy INTC making 2.5x 2016 NET income (11B vs. 23.6B today) when shares were 38. Stock should be above $80 as shares have been bought back every quarter since 2008 (only one Q in 12yrs went up). 2008 shares outstanding were 5.7B, today 4.2B. Thus easy to see $38 x 2.x + buybacks = probably closer to $100. If Intel posts a 24B+ year next year explain to me why it isn't above $70 from Jan2020? This Q dampened by corona etc, but we're coming back and their income isn't ~12-15B all of the sudden is it? NOPE.
Stock is a bargain at $52 still making 23B and still saying full year great (despite Q3 not too good I think). They took a massive haircut on fake fab news that is really over at this point knowing Intel is holding TSMC chips in hand, not even mentioning Intel about a year ahead on 3 types of packaging tech that could change things quickly anyway. It is a pity AMD took 3yrs to charge more. Intel would have gladly never reduced prices. That said, wait for the Q report, any bad news will end with it IMHO and you may get a decent discount before exploding next year as Intel won't be losing net income for 2021 so stock goes above 70 previous high by next xmas, and Q1 2022 probably hitting $100 at some point (sooner if Net income hits 25B+?). We're not talking AMD here, this is real INCOME. For any PRICE whiners on cpu or gpu: Just buy 3-5K Intel in the next month and laugh next year with FREE xmas PC. Smart people got it at $43 on fake fab news like Intel was out of business or something. Start making NET INCOME LISA SU or give back some of that 59mil salary. Your console love is killing AMD every freaking year it exists.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I was waiting for this inevitable post from TheJian. It's especially ironic on an article where a bunch of the comments are complaints that AMD have... *drumroll* raised their prices.Some people can use a whole lot of words to say very, very little.
Qasar - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
i read his posts as blah blah blah blah.. rant rant rant rant.. and riddled with pro intel garbage to prove how much he loves intel.completely inconsequential.
TheJian - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
I hope you don't own AMD, about to pay for another ATI...LOL. Not pro Intel, pro making money on the stock until I can't then hate it ;) Just like AMD now, Nvidia now...Owned both just before Intel...So...I care about making money on my money so chip prices mean NOTHING to me, and I don't have to whine like the rest of you about $50-100...LOL. OMG they raised prices so they maybe can make some net income to support that $80+ share price even thought they make income today for a YEAR that is less than a SINGLE quarter from 2009 with double shares outstanding etc etc etc...Jeez the case is awful here. I see no data from anyone debating me. Thanks, I'll check again tomorrow. Nobody downing data yet, thanks that's the point of the posts :)Qasar - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
yea ok, bla bla bka bla blaSpunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Yup. If he's not waffling about stonks, he's tugging himself off for his ability to waffle about stonks.Teckk - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Yeah, he would also rant about CEO pay somewhere in there I guess. Best to ignore.TheJian - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
You don't like making money I guess.https://islamreigns.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pa...
Learn to debate or just STFU :) When will this site get a dang block button for fools like this.
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
It's bold of you to assume that you made a point worthy of refutation. 🤭TheJian - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Clearly, yes, for you best to ignore. You don't own stock, or CEO pay would bug you at this level for this income vs the rest of the list of S&P top ten CEO's.https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/hi...
Look at the NET INCOME of all the other companies on the list BELOW her...LOL. IF you don't get the point...Best to ignore you always. You will cost people money on stocks :(
https://islamreigns.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pa...
No debate from you either...You can't debate my points I guess, thanks, I post just to see if anyone can down the data. You made it to maybe 2 or 3? Rant sounds like tone, I'll give you lvl2-3 but it's weak at best as you didn't even make a point. Best to ignore people who ignore data. Was my CEO pay comment out of line, or accurate? Everyone on the list is killing AMD's income. The guy in the 10th spot made 1.7B for his millions (far below hers at only 30mil). Make a billion already AMD at least for the year! This isn't 2009!
Debate the data or STFU? ;) What is the point of your post exactly? CPU share 20% but income isn't going up a buck vs. previous years. Hmmm...Yeah, she's worth it. EEtimes gave her Executive of the year for 2014, she was hired Oct 2014 (hired at AMD 2012). It's like an obama Pulitzer for something he can't even name, while donald has 3 votes for REAL PEACE progress deals. It would appear she was handed designs we've seen today (takes 5yrs to make a cpu), and can't make much money on it even with winners. Most of the map we've seen since she arrived was DONE or in tapeout etc and she hasn't done much with it yet. Keller's pipeline is probably about exhausted. But that doesn't mean they can't make more, iterate on it, etc...I'm just saying...
LISA SU pushed the console crap. Look it up. She is directly responsible for wasting R&D on single to mid teen digit margins on those wasted wafers. Keller etc started ZEN 2012 (launch Q2 2017 -4.5-5yrs), while Lisa pushed diversification from 90% cpu/gpu to 60% from Oct 2014 on, and the rest is peanut junk and wasted wafers on consoles.
You should not be proud of shifting from high margin cpu/gpu to 40% products from mid teens or lower margins (AMD said single digits to mid teens, never more yet AFAIK). This is the EXACT opposite of what Intel did when short wafers (move production to server/hedt for MARGIN!). That is a FAIL and why they are not making BILLIONS per year now at 20% share. You have the WRONG 20% share, if you're making 660mil while the other guy makes 23.6B TTM on 80%. Quick math shows it should be 5-6B for AMD INCOME. You are too lazy or dumb debate me. My attacks on Lisa Su are warranted based on DATA right in front of your face. You DOUBLED your share of the cpu market from 11% 2017 (zen launch) to 20% today, but you can't hit 1B NET INCOME from Dec2009 Q? Keller etc's work is being wasted and I'm thinking his designs will be about out shortly and we'll see what comes after from Su's leadership now design wise (more console crap surely).
Dirk Meyer would be making 5B+ yearly right now on these cpus and NEVER would have OK'd console R&D until CPU/GPU income allowed it. Dirk said make kings not crap 2011 before being fired for it! Su has no idea how to deal with kings it seems. PRICE like a king if you have one. PERIOD. She's winning awards for diversity (SJW crap) instead of net income. Her income vs. AMD's makes sense now. :)
Oct 2014 she made CEO & lost 350mil. So far all Q's since she's been CEO, -376mil net income if you add up every Q that she's been CEO for. Now add up her income for 5yrs. Still don't see the point?
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/...
You can add right? That sheet and just about every other data point you can click on that site should make shareholders shake in their boots. Never mind the data you can mine on a paid stock site. Bring back the DARK MAYOR, he gets it.
Anyone thinking I hate AMD is an idiot and probably doesn't even know what I just said (Dark Mayor who?). I was an AMD re-seller for ~9yrs fighting Intel in the 90's/20's (not in Intel program)...LOL. I made tons of posts attacking intel at toms/anandtech etc over bapco crap (they owned their land, registered their domain etc..ROFL), downing Van Smith over exposing tomshwardware (they removed his name from his articles too!) etc. Not a fan of any company, especially Intel. That said, I'll take the money they'll make me in the next 18mo and fully appreciate management and how they've lost share, set revenue/income records, while losing fab race for years, short wafers, 10% market not even served, etc. That is GREAT management correct (moving to TSMC good move for a time too)? They are in a perfect storm, but managing silicon super smart to make INCOME still as if it wasn't happening. Results don't lie, people like you do. Ignore me if you hate your wallet :)
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMD/amd/...
Share outstanding for Lisa SU entering CEO 750mil. TODAY 1.22B. In case you missed it, that is like taking your $100 bill in your pocket, and now it's only worth ~$60 or so. Are you taking this in? I'm trying to give you ignorant instead of stupid, but I'm leaning towards stupid with you after realizing all the data points I've given even before this post that you ignored already.
All the whiners about price should ignore this guy and start listening to people like me trying to explain how you can make money ON your money so you can work less and whine less. :) Hate every company; Love stocks that make money for you (and only for that long...ROFL). AMD is 100% hype at this income. I'm not in Vegas (well my VPN says I am now..ROFL, wait, no NY today - netherlands later...LOL), I like safe investing and no losses.
Buying AMD today at this income, shares, etc, is like betting in vegas where the house knows ALL cards and you're drunk. I fully explained why this is not good to buy, but you love the company (why? Work there?), so can't swallow facts/data.
More data for you guys, so attack my data people, if you can. Nobody can read everything, so these posts are to see if anyone can poke holes in data. I'm searching for a way to buy AMD at some point, but just can't see it until a crash or Billion+ NET INCOME Q's. Oh and I prefer at least 4 in a row to prove direction at this point AMD (a year!). I think servers will make it worth $80 at some point maybe (5nm/3nm?), but they are priced as if making 5B heading to 6+ NOW rather than 2-3yrs away. I can't risk that much VEGAS (owned AMD not long ago BTW).
FWIW my mom made $900 in a day on AMD a week or two ago...ROFL. WE don't hate them, but I scolded her and so did my dad. He likes data, but my mom's excuse for buying AMD? It was going up today...WTH? I almost blocked her PC at the router. My dad freaked (two retirees). I told her if she ever does that again without proof of WHY, I'll destroy her PC and shut her down for life. That inheritance is mine and she's gambling with it (lost 2K on apple the next week...WTH are you doing? Same reason). In that debate, she couldn't see 900-2000 is a loss, not a win for the week and I hate day traders! Anandtech forcing me to cut post...LOL.
Qasar - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
another rant from the jian, * yawn *Teckk - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
I just want to block you so I don’t have to see the long unnecessary posts. I hope the comments section is updated here.Also, not interested in attack or debates. Here for discussion but not with someone like you. Didn’t even have to read your post to respond 😂
GeoffreyA - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
You're too clever for me, sir, who am but a simple person and can't understand all this talk of stocks and money; yet, as I read your posts, only one thought strikes me again and again, the words of old Polonius, "That brevity is the soul of wit / Tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes."nandnandnand - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Taiwan #1TheJian - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
It is a pity you have no idea how to debate the data.https://islamreigns.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pa...
You are attacking me for telling AMD to make more money? How is that Anti AMD? Wake me when you learn to debate. Can't argue with the data huh? I want to own AMD stock again, but there is no reason to. I love no company, only the money I can make on them. I'll sell Intel as soon as I have no faith in the stock price again (yeah, again, owned them all, NV/AMD/INTC/MSFT etc over and over).
AMD produces no net income for decades, and you still don't get it. You completely ignored the data. Check the links..drumroll - I win.
Some people make statements that say NOTHING. :) Why type? My post was to save AMD stockholders from getting burned AGAIN. It isn't worth $10. See the data. How many numbers were there in my post that said "very little"? ROFLMAO. I can only conclude you are an idiot if you can't see data in my post...LOL. All it is, is DATA point after point, easily verifiable.
Can you attack the data at all? You have nothing :) It's hard to argue with sound logic, so all you have is name calling, tone, BS comments. Ok, who's that helping? I take it you can't afford your gpu or cpu...ROFL. AMD bought all mine for years to come. Yeah, I hate AMD...ROFL. BTW, NV bought even more, just saying. Intel about to buy tons more future chips/pc's etc.
All you got out of that post was prices? IF you buy Intel today, your next gpu/cpu price doesn't matter next xmas 2021. Stay ignorant/broke. You have that right ;)
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
🥱MDD1963 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
If AMD's CPUs can finally outframe (in games) Intel again (last time in 2005 or so), the price hike might actually 'work'...Golgatha777 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
For the upcoming article, I'd like to have benchmarks for the 3000 series to compare to. Specifically because the 5800X looks close in price to current 3900(X) pricing. Most games are GPU limited, so multi-threaded software benchmarks like Handbrake, etc. are of particular interest to me for overall desktop usage.Alistair - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Part of the problem is they might have just caught up in gaming, but they are quite ahead outside of gaming. Expect 20-30 percent. Prices are a real bummer though.coolrock2008 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Is it a typo or is it intended? The article says this :"The Ryzen 7 5800X is expected to follow in the footsteps of the popular Ryzen 7 3700X" But i am guessing the author meant to say 3800X given the pricing and TDP. 3800X was a 105W processor with $400 MSRP at launch. 3700X was $329 and 65W TDP.fatweeb - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
There were rumors that AMD is constrained by supply from TSMC a few months ago. I suspect that might be the reason for the price hike. The new CPUs are going to sell out anyway, and AMD doesn't want to leave money on the table.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Pretty much. They'll drop over time, as and when Intel respond.Mucko - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You fanboys/girls blow my mind with your idiocy.Intel makes hundreds of billions in revenue yearly...which equates to, with their pricing...around 60 billion a year in profits.
Amd makes around 28 billion in revenue...and at the end of the day...around 98 million dollars.
What do you think pays for research and development?
Intel is NOT caught between anything except a release of a product that is barely keeping up with and slightly exceeding their processors from LAST YEAR.
Atleast AMD has figured it out and decided to increase their pricing so they can avoid going bankrupt which they've been on the verge of by pricing things at fanboy levels.
Learn how to business and then start making comments...beyond that. Intel is on top for a reason. Market share does NOT matter when you are NOT making any profit.
Love,
Mucko
Carmen00 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Gosh, Mucko, you've really put things into perspective here. But help me out: with all these billions of dollars in profit, why do you think that Intel chips have been increasingly uncompetitive over the past few years? Some would say that throwing money at a hard problem doesn't always make it go away, but those people are probably just communists (or engineers). I'm sure you have your own opinion about it — after all, you have opinions about so many things! — so please do share your enlightenment with us.Also, having looked at AMD's figures, it sure doesn't look like they're going bankrupt. Some (such as those who can add and subtract correctly) would even say that they're making a profit. But maybe you're on to something. Why don't you go off and write an article about how AMD is on the verge of bankruptcy?
Have you considered applying to be CFO at AMD, Mucko? I'm sure that, after years of increasing profit and market share — which, as you know, inevitably leads to bankruptcy — they'd love to benefit from your wisdom. Send your resume in. Let us know what they say.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"You fanboys/girls blow my mind with your idiocy."Always a solid opening to an exercise in hypocrisy, projection and unconstrained Dunning Kruger.
Timur Born - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Please compare Total War turn-times in later rounds with lots of DLC factions installed, it's not always about moar fps with gaming. Turn-times can literally takes several minutes with the user twiddling thumbs while the CPU does its thing.Also compare times for flipping through many images (JPEG, TIFF) and through image heavy PDF files. These things are still single-threaded and I eagerly await an image format that finally allows multi-threading to be used for decoding single image files (or software that reads multiple files via multiple threads).
Pinn - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
That and civ will only get faster if devs get less lazy with multithreading.abufrejoval - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
You ask for review interests, here are mine, perhaps somewhat specific:While I do use my systems for gaming, too, they pay for themselves via work. And there I have some specific interests, which you might want to shed a light on.
1. Power management. This is often a power/noise tradeoff and even if not, because the consumption/performance curves are exponential, the ability to cap (or not) power consumption, preferably via APIs command line tools on Windows and Linux at run-time, would be ideal. I'd love to be able to tell the 16-core: Please make do with 10/20/40/80 Watts so fans don't rev beyond audible and let it rip right there, boosting to 5GHz or whatnot on a single core or 2 GHz on 16 cores as I juggle real-time vs batchy loads. Having to twiddle with such settings in the BIOS is a real drag and the point of having a high-core CPU is that you do several rather different tasks on such a system
2. ECC, RAS, encrypted RAM etc. I just love virtualizing entire clusters of systems on my big machines. Putting 16 cores and 128GB of RAM and terabytes of NVMe storage into a system no longer requires selling your house: Cancelling Christmas for the kids to make daddy happy might just do it nowadays. And to make that worth while, I'd pay a little extra to have a system that will run reliably for days to months, meaning ECC memory among other things. And one set of features I'd really like to have even on 'consumer desktops' is the ability to run VMs in a very trusted environment, specifically with memory encryption for the virtual guest and ideally with control flow integrity extensions active.
Encrypted VMs (Intel calls that multi-key total memory encryption or MKTME): With AMD this is currently an Epyc feature and labelled SEV. Intel hasn't explicitly limited that to server SKUs. It really is something I'd love to see on anything starting with laptops, because it would allow running highly secure corporate enclave VMs on bring-your-own or stay-at-home desktops.
Control flow integrity via shadow-stacks and other things are clearly a defensive mechanism I'd want in my armory, perhaps a little less when I am aiming for FPS in gaming, but very much whilst I am doing my banking and tax returns online. I'd love to know what AMD stands on CFI!
In short: The bigger a system, the less likely it is single purpose. It's ability to adapt to different use-cases, energy, noise, reliability and security constraints *while operating* becomes a decive quality. I'd want that system to go full throttle while gaming, while going practically silent sipping miniscule energy and putting 95% of its resources to sleep while running the home through the night, casually fighting off all those malware nasties perpetually after everything you value.
1 penny left and I am all in - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Holy Cow 16 cores better than 3950x under $1k, I am going to buy one soon. Intel just don't have this kind of cores competition / $ any more. This is the day I'll stop buying any Intel cpu unless they doing something better and cheaper. lol. fat chances.Alistair - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Intel is at 4 core Tiger Lake right now. Maybe we'll get 8 core 14nm Tiger Lake light in 2021. Where are the 16 cores? Nowhere. Intel is crushed honestly in the high end desktop right now.Alistair - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
tigerlake-liteSan Pedro - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I'm a little disappointed with the pricing, but not surprised. The problem will be bigger in my region which has the 3900x at just under $600 and the 3700x at over $400. Looks like if I upgrade I'll just order from American amazon and have it shipped to save money, or just look for a used 3950x to replace my 2700x.vbigdeli - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
So built with TSMC N7 or N7 plus ?Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
N7, apparently - but benefiting from improved knowledge of the node.nandnandnand - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Are we sure it's not "N7P"?https://www.anandtech.com/show/15589/amd-clarifies...
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Ah, yes - perhaps that's it. Not N7+ though.Node nomenclature is becoming a real headache.
Danvelopment - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
It's a bit odd their IPC example used the 12 core chips (with 6 cores per chip in the 5000) for an 8 core comparison.Why not the 8 core chips? Or do a 12 core comparison?
It kind of seems like AMD have done an Intel. "Whoops, competition is low, so we'll just update performance incrementally, save on coolers while also bumping the price"
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
"update performance incrementally"19% year-on-year, incremental? Okay then 🙄
Orkiton - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Prices:After Intel knocked AMD to the ropes they charged a huge tax to consumers, made a pile of cash, distributed fair dividends and still saved a lot for R&D. It's almost a miracle what Lina Su achieved. To keep leadership over Intel, distribute fair dividends to investors and generate cash flow for R&D, that ultimately will benefit consumers and the industry, AMD cannot be the like of Mother Teresa of Calcutta.
Carmen00 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Let me get this straight:- Intel charged a huge tax to consumers, made a pile of cash, distributed fair dividends, saved a lot for R&D ... and is still falling behind on the CPU side.
- AMD is like "Mother Teresa of Calcutta" ... and has been at the cutting-edge of x86 CPUs for the past few years.
So to "keep leadership over Intel", AMD should ... emulate the company which is losing market share? I'm struggling to see your logic here. Based on the track record of the past few years, it seems that Lisa Su has better ideas than you do, and you should probably leave the planning to her.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I think, like many of the more irately partisan posts on here, you're picking a fight with someone who agrees with you.zeeBomb - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
the war has wonJaianiesh03 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Any idea how this compares to apple silicon a14?Jaianiesh03 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Heard some geek bench leaks pointing to a 19% increase for apple so laptop a14 would beat zen 3 rightSpunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Not really, no. 19% increase over what is the question.Jaianiesh03 - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
19 percent over A13 which beats zen 2 by 5% integer and lags behind by 5%in FP perf. The mobile A14 is a 19 % increase in ST perf. That means technically a higher clocked laptop A14 should match zen 3 at half the power?Gio97BR - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Geekbench is biased towards ARM chips.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Only if you assume GeekBench performance translates directly to application performance, which would be a bold assumption.Jaianiesh03 - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Im talking about SPEC2006 performance which according to andrei is a fair comparisionSpunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Fair, but I was still responding to this claim:"Heard some geek bench leaks pointing to a 19% increase for apple"
I'm not sure these are direct competitors anyway - not many people will happily flip between MacOS and Windows. Perhaps if they sort out Boot Camp - and MS sort out x64 emulation on ARM - it might be more of a direct comparison,
GeoffreyA - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
Even if it is better performance per watt on Apple's side (and hats off to them for the excellent work), the thing is, Core and Ryzen have got all the overhead of x86 decoding, which takes a lot of power, and is a sort of handicap, as far as I'm aware. Personally, I think that if AMD and Intel were to design their main CPUs as ARM ones, they'd likely beat Apple's A CPUs. Just my opinion though, and I'm not trying to propose that ARM takes over.Pinn - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Doesn't matter a14x is going into macs.charlesg - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Your last sentence is asking for what comparisons matter most?I would like to see the top two benched against the equivalent prior gen. I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering if I should grab a 39xx or a 59xx to upgrade from my 2700x.
I'd also like to see "officially supported" AIO and air coolers benched on the top two, looking at cooling capacity as well as quietness. I have a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 Dual Tower now which keeps my 2700x pretty cool, even when the ambient temp in my office is > 90 degrees F. (Southern AZ no AC...) But the noise gets to be an issue.
Thanks.
charlesg - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
To clarify, I'm looking at productivity and multi-threaded performance (7z, video encoding, and so forth). Not gaming.xaphod - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
What's the story with APUs in these things? My understanding was that the zen 3s would have APUs that will power the B550 mobo's HDMI ports etc, because the zen2s cannot do it... but I don't see any mention of this anywhere. Do these parts have compatible APUs with the B550 boards?Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
There are Zen 2 APUs but they're still OEM only (supply constrained). Zen 3 APUs aren't due until later next year (probably by Q3)xaphod - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Thanks. Very weird to me that all the non-OEM mobos being sold with DP + HDMI, for more than a year if Q3 2021 launch per your forecast, are completely useless (DP + HDMI I mean).Qasar - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
well there is the ryzen 3200G and 3400G that has built in graphics. but those are based on Zen+.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
They also can't go into B550 boards. I know this because I was hoping to build a system with a 3200G and B550 and then update later, and was very disappointed to find out I couldn't.Qasar - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
they dont ?Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Nope, but don't take my word for it:https://www.amd.com/en/chipsets/b550
B550 doesn't support anything before Zen 2.
Qasar - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
hmmm interesting, i guess support for it was pushed out to make room in the bios ?Spunjji - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
I'm honestly not sure - I thought they'd fixed that issue.If I'm being cynical, it's probably to save time and money on validation whilst reaping the benefits of forcing some people to upgrade and/or spend more money than they'd ideally like to.
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Yeah, it's a crappy situation. Seems likely that AMD are supply constrained here.lmcd - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The move from 4 core dies to 8 core dies drops their yield right back down again (though probably not introductory Ryzen 3000 levels). Of course it's $50 more! That unified cache cost is extremely far from free.Zizy - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Size of CCX is irrelevant, chiplet size matters. That one should be about the same.Kjella - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
It's irrelevant for perfect chips. For usable yields it's about how many parts can be isolated and disabled. If you have a 2x4 CCX you'll get both 2x4 and 1x4 usable chips. Make 1x8 CCX and it either works or you throw it away. Even if the 1x4 chips sell for much less, losing them means you have to charge more for the full chips.P.S. $750 -> $800 = 6.7% for the 5950X over the 3950X is a no-brainer. It's just in the value market that AMD has decided they don't need to play the underdog anymore. And they can always drop the price if they feel like it, it's much harder to start at $250 and realize it should have been $300 than the other way around.
Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
"Make 1x8 CCX and it either works or you throw it away" - not really, they're still selling chips using 6 cores of the CCD. Unless you're specifically referring to problems with the cache?wr3zzz - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The price hikes put Intel back in play for me. I am still leaning AMD for my current build plan but it's like 60/40 now rather than 100%.shady28 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
Ya, that's the thing here. 5600X is competing in price vs 10700 (non K), and the 5800X is price competitive vs 10900K. That means AMD is running a 6c/12t chip vs Intel 8c/16t and an 8c/16t vs Intel 10c/20t in terms of price. That comparison may not work out quite the way they planned.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
How? You can straightforwardly get better performance at similar perf/$ with a 5000 series, or better perf/$ and similar performance with a 3000 series.The smart money is on buying a 500 motherboard and a 3600, then updating later to a 5000 series chip when the prices drop.
charlesg - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
The smart money depends a lot on what you currently have.In my case, that's a 2700X on a B450.
So the smart money for me is wait for clearance sales on 3900s or maybe a 3950, and then have a cheaper path for a 5900 or 5950 later when the next gen comes out. (Presumably the BIOS kinks for 5000s on the B450 will resolved ... and I skip the 550 boards altogether.)
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Yeah, that would be a very sound plan indeed!DonMiguel85 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
generational comparisons with the 2600 and 2700X please. Also performance differences when using 4 DIMMs/ranks of memory.Koenig168 - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
The 3700X launched at $329. It's the 3700XT that launched at $399. So the price increase from 5800X over the 3700X it replaces is $120 and not $50.webdoctors - Thursday, October 8, 2020 - link
I got the Ryzen 7 2700X for $150 with free games almost a year ago. The pricing on these will need to be fixed if they want to crush Intel. Let's see what happens post release. Professionals won't care about pricing though so that's fine but not sure how much volume there.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Comparing discounts on the second-gen chips upon the release of the third-generation to the fourth-gen on release is... not smart?zodiacfml - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
finally and probably more impressive once we have seen the numbers. This will also improve fps numbers for the RTX 3080 on 1440p and lower resolutions. now that AMD is on top and so is the premium pricing. The 5600x is out of my budget for occasional loads and gaming use unlike the 3600 where I can still stretch it.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
It might not, because the inability for Ampere to fully utilise its resources are lower resolutions has more to do with the way the architecture is designed than the CPU.Teckk - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
When was the last time Intel had a similar performance uplift generation to generation on the SAME process node?Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Sandy Bridge!Teckk - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
9 years then. So this is AMD's Core moment?I'm not sure of Rocket Lake but what is the desktop and mobile equivalent of Saphire Rapids?
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Looks like it!I believe that's Alder Lake-S?
Teckk - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
That’s coming next year, both in non ULV and for desktops?Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Yup - "second-half of 2021" is the current estimated release date. Going on their current record, that probably means September at the earliest, but if they really have sorted their 10nm issues then it might be earlier.Teckk - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Really looking forward to a "good and proper" Intel 10nm CPU going against AMD on a similar node. But Q4 next year means AMD will certainly be on enhanced 7nm or even 5nm for some products and not sure which version of Intel's 10nm. Should be interesting though, if SPR and its derivatives are as good.Spunjji - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
Me too! As someone who's always been fascinated by Intel's process node developments, the delays to 10nm and accompanying product screw-ups have been a long-running disappointment. They might just-about catch AMD before their transition to 5nm, and they may even be on 10nm "Enhanced SuperFin" by the time they do. It'll make for an interesting comparison.StvAl - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
4.9 GHz nice! But I don't get it. Why is it called 59 50X, it should have been called 59 49X :) When 5.0 GHz part comes out, it should be called 59 50X :)Atom2 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Three years back Intel 7820x, 8 core CPU for $599USD and now AMD is selling the same for $150 less. Not much difference.Kutark - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
First off that had a single core boost of 4.3ghz, and i would be willing to bet the IPC on the new ryzen 5000's is probably 40% higher than that CPU. I'm not sure what you're trying to say/complain about?Nicon0s - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Yeah Zen 3 probably has 25% IPC advantage at least and 10% higher frequency plus much better efficiency. The 5800X is in another league. Even the 9900k will be no match for AMDs latest Ryzen processors.suyashsngh250 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I don't understand, how is AMD able to reduce latency for Ryzen 5900X if its still the same chiplet design. Has IPC improvement alone has helped in increased gaming performance.Zizy - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Instead of 2 chiplets with 2x CCX each, these parts now have 2 chiplets with 1x "CCX". Access to cache and other cores is now better => latency is lower. Obvious cost of this improvement is increased complexity of CCX - easier to have 4 fully linked cores than to have 8 cores with whatever design (it almost surely isn't fully linked, too many connections).edzieba - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Review interests: overall system latency, and specifically VR motion-photons latency and latency consistency. Without a new chipset series I'm not expecting this to have much improvement over the 3xxx series chips, but hopefully the less-heterogenous layout may help. With any luck a future 600-series chipset might finally ditch the thrice-be-damned Asmedia USB root hub for something less awful.pauldoo - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
I wonder what the 8 core CCX will mean for Zen 3 APUs. Typically the Ruben APUs have used a single CCX meaning 4 cores. Should we expect Zen 3 APUs to be 8 core?pauldoo - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
s/Ruben/Ryzen/Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Zen 2 APUs (4000 series) are already 8 core, so yes, I'd imagine the same will be true for Zen 3.msroadkill612 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
What? Both GPU (our biggest spend) makers have switched to pcie 4?Meh - what would they know?
I am gonna get intel anyway.
nandnandnand - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Have fun with the inferior CPU.msroadkill612 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
As I recall, Henry Ford hated banks (he even took ford private), & when the very long running model T inarguably needed replacing along w/ his factory, his finance plan was simple. Raise prices until it was paid for, then reduce them again.There may be an element of that in amd's strategy? Borrowings are more dangerous than most realise. U can be 100% right, but just wrong timing can screw you.
quadibloc - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
If the price of an AMD 12 core chip is slightly higher than the price of an Intel 10 core chip... then AMD chips are still cheaper. But dropping the stock cooler on the 8-core and 12-core parts says to me those chips are running hotter than they're letting on.Spunjji - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
5600X vs. 3600 and 3600X are the comparisons I'm most interested in - bsides that, seeing how much they've raised the bar at the top-end would also be lovely.Definitely need to see how the core-for-core comparisons look between these chips and Comet Lake.
WaltC - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
It's not apparent that Ian watched the presentation--I think he needs to go back and watch Papermaster's segment again...;) What does this mean:"With a base frequency of 3.7 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.8 GHz, AMD is calling this processor the ‘World’s Best Gaming CPU’. This is likely because of the lower core count than the other Ryzen 9 allowing slightly higher frequencies when a game loads up several of the cores – the six cores per chiplet lowers the thermal density when running, enabling higher frequencies."
Base frequency of the 3900X 12ct/12t is 3.8GHz...so does this mean AMD is dropping it by 1GHz, or is this a misprint? Secondly--"the other R9"--12c/24t 3900X has four CCX's, with each CCD containing containing two CCXs. Please explain "lower core count"--lower than what?...;) "The other R9" is not informative.
Also, Papermaster explained that the entire architecture has been reworked and latencies have been improved. Try looking at his section again.
WaltC - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Edit above...actually, the 5900X's 3.7GHz base clock will run faster than the 3.8GHz 3900X because of the ~20% increase in IPC--while running cooler because of consuming less power, possibly.Still waiting to hear about the "other R9"--which other R9? there is more than one...;)
ahenriquedsj - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
This is massive.HarryVoyager - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Personally. I'm interested in VR performance. Most of the VR flight sims are single thread DX11 titles that only seem to run well on Intel chips, with big deficits on even the fastest Zen 2 chips.And it seems to be something inherent to flight sims, since pretty much all of them run slower on Ryzen, even when they are completely unrelated engines written by completely unrelated companies.
Oxford Guy - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
"single thread DX11"If VR developers are that lazy I wouldn't reward them with my business.
hugomax - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
that is just a view of the other side; PCIe 4 isn't needed; Intel has integrated GPU with less Watt TDP,/manyidiots
Teckk - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Intel’s next gen chips will have PCIe-4, what would you say then?Intel also has K series processors without integrated graphics.
Many might be idiots but be informed yourself before calling names.
Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
The K processors still have an iGPU, it's just disabled.Teckk - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
Ah, ok. That person’s comment didn’t make any sense at all but now I don’t see any response lol.thorr2 - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
As a gamer, is the 5600x enough? I plan to use it with VR for Star Wars Squadrons and probably other VR games. My current Intel Quadcore CPU is very old, but still going strong. I can play Overwatch with it on my 4K TV at 60 FPS no problem with my GTX 1070. According to the minimum CPU specs for Squadrons, my CPU is too slow. I haven't bought the game yet and tried it.The 5600x seems like a good deal because it has lower power requirements, comes with a cooler, and is significantly cheaper, yet the clock speed and cache are right up there with the others, just less cores. If I plan to keep this for 10 years, would I regret going with the 5600x? I don't play a lot of different games, but when something like Squadrons comes along, I want to be able to play it.
awev - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
If you where planning to upgrade every couple years then I would say just buy what you need for now, things will change, but the software is trailing behind right now. You are looking to keep the same system for ten years, so buy the best you can afford - hardware and software will of advanced a fair amount by that time. And a game you didn't even know that you would want to play finial materialized - the game is only in a designer's dreams right now.thorr2 - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Thanks everyone. It sounds like today the 5600x is good enough for just about anything from a gaming perspective, and if this changes down the road, I can just drop in a new CPU at that time if I feel I need to. I may decide to go with the 5800x after seeing the reviews though. It is a lot more money though for maybe no real benefit to me since I don't play a lot of games. I do plan on doing a lot of VR and having more cores may help with that to keep the frame rates up and latency down.nandnandnand - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
There's an obvious argument for an 8-core since the consoles will have 8 cores. $450 is steep though, I would wait for that price to drop.blppt - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
Consoles have had 8 core cpus for 7 years now, and we still have yet to see a PC game that *really* benefits from more than 4 cores/8 threads (all else being equal).nandnandnand - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
XB1 and PS4 had 8 weak Jaguar cores. Only 1 thread per core, and only about 6-7 cores were available for game developers to use (1-2 cores were reserved for the OS). The result is something easy to match with a quad-core.XSX and PS5 have 8 Zen 2 cores, with much better IPC, clock speeds, AVX performance, etc. Also 2 threads per core, although I'm not sure how many cores/threads are available.
So you will see more games using 8 cores to their full potential starting around 2022. I hope that some future games will be able to utilize 12, 16, 24, 32, 64, etc. cores given that there will be more parallelization to begin with, but we can't count on that.
azfacea - Friday, October 9, 2020 - link
as if it wasnt bad enof already, it seems AMD brought sunny cove to desktop sooner than intel LULOxford Guy - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Naming products according to superstition makes as much sense as saying all of this instead of 'cause duopoly':"AMD believes that the increased raw performance of its product demands pricing more consummate with its position in the market, and so we see a slight MSRP increase from $399 to $449."
Oxford Guy - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
AMD should have given Zen 3 the ability to do quad channel DDR4 (with the right board, of course), to compensate for how old DDR4 is.nandnandnand - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
That was never going to happen. I'm hoping to see more memory channels with Zen 4, except that DDR5 has a "two channels per module" design so we could see systems with 4 DIMMs but marketed as having 8 memory channels.Oxford Guy - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
"That was never going to happen." No kidding. Companies try to give people as little performance as they can. Their goal is to maximize margin. Sell less for more."I'm hoping to see more memory channels with Zen 4, except that DDR5 has"
Of course DDR5 is going to be a carrot on a stick to tell people to upgrade.
azfacea - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
this is very dum idea. its tanks should be able to fly for short distances. not only that motherboard you speak of exists and its called threadripper. quad channel memory would hurt latency, and require a new socket, just one year before ddr5 goes mainstream. how do u put quad channel memory in micro atx and mini itx, or should those users pay for sillicon that they cant use ???Oxford Guy - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Threadripper doesn't have quad channel."quad channel memory would hurt latency" So? Having 4 RAM sticks in T topology might hurt latency some but that doesn't mean everyone sticks with 2 sticks and daisy chain.
"how do u put quad channel memory in micro atx and mini itx"
Who cares?
"or should those users pay for sillicon that they can't use"
Minuscule cost involved.
Qasar - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
actually, according to this:https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-thre...
threadripper does support quad channel.
Oxford Guy - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Interesting. Nevermind then. As long as quad support is available via TR that’s good enough.Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Why? What benefit would it provide?Oxford Guy - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
More bandwidth.Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Yes, obviously, but *to what benefit*? The vast majority of use cases for these chips would see little to no benefit from the increased bandwidth.Meanwhile they'd need a new socket to account for the extra pins needed for quad-channel memory, which would increase costs - more development and validation needed, higher cost of of boards for the extra traces needed, etc. All for a few percent in performance at most on the majority of apps.
There's a reason they have Threadripper and Epyc for use cases that genuinely need more bandwidth.
Oxford Guy - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Threadripper doesn’t have quad channel RAM. Zen 3 could have implemented quad channel RAM with Threadripper. The complaint about a new socket is weak because AMD already obsoleted the 1st gen TR boards.Oxford Guy - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
As for “what end?”, an article here already answered that and said testing data will be forethcoming.DDR4 is old and AMD could have made Zen3’s inability to support both DDR4 and DDR5 less of a drawback by giving the chip the ability to support quad channel RAM. Perhaps there will be a third TR refresh that will do that.
Halfprice - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
"Threadripper doesn't have quad channel RAM". Uhhh, yes it does. All Threadrippers ever made have at least four memory channels. Threadripper Pro which is OEM only has eight memory channels like Epyc.Spunjji - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
"Threadripper doesn’t have quad channel RAM"Wrong.
Zen 3 Threadripper hasn't been announced yet, but you can guarantee when it does it will use Quad Channel because, once again, Zen 2 Threadripper already does.
My "complaint" (not a complaint) about a new socket isn't "weak" because it has nothing to do with Threadripper. We were talking about mainstream desktop until you decided to start moving the goalposts around. 🙄
awev - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
Looks like the 5000 series has a price increase of 6.7% to 20% compared to their 3000 series counterparts, for a 19% performance increase in the IPC. So for the 5950 the 6.7% increase in price makes the 19% performance increase a better value than the 20% price increase for the 5600.Halfprice - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
It stands to reason given AMD's situation. Everything they make gets sold and it's hard to get a hold of many of their products. They are production capacity constrained and are launching the best ever processors to whom and at what price should that production capacity go?liquid_c - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
This article seems more like a PR note on AMD’s behalf rather than a normal launch (make that announcement) one.Sad part is, those frequencies that AMD claims will (barely) be obtainable on one core and one core only (especially if the recent events, as shown by Tom’s, are to be taken into account) while Intel’s offerings can actually go on 5ghz on all cores (even more, on their higher end offerings, when proper cooling is present). So this means that any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel.
I’m mighty curious about the 1080p gaming tests. Those are most relevant when it comes to CPUs.
Qasar - Saturday, October 10, 2020 - link
liquid_c , sad part is, no one knows that for sure, unless i missed something and you can provide a link, i dont recall any one talking about overclocking, or how high each core gets to, or max all core."So this means that any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel. " we will find out for sure on nov 5th
TBH, who cares about 5ghz, its just a number, and only intel needs to go that high.
Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Launches are PR announcements. Or did you forget that Intel just launched Tiger Lake with no products and a PR platform sent to reviewers that, it turns out, really doesn't represent performance in shipping products?Spunjji - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
You also failed to demonstrate how you suppose that "any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel" but that's okay, we can safely presume you pulled that out of your ass.shady28 - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
Well for Tiger Lake, what you're saying is false. One google and you'll find plenty of reviews of a pre-prod laptop that was provided within a week or so of launch, speculated at the time to be an MSI laptop. In the past couple of weeks there are a number of reviews of shipping product showing up in multiple places.Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
@shady28: Did you read my post before replying? I referred to that pre-prod laptop specifically. NotebookCheck have now reviewed / previewed three Tiger Lake devices in addition to that preview model, and none of them (not one) can manage the same level of sustained 28W performance as the demo unit. One of them (Asus Zenbook Flip S) substantially under-performs its 15W performance too:https://www.notebookcheck.net/Enough-with-the-conf...
shady28 - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
The very article you link to, has a chart with the pre-prod laptop in it, and 4 shipping production laptops. The pre-prod at 15W beats one of them (which the author put in 3 different modes) and the other 3 beat the pre-prod at 15W. None of the shipping laptops were setup for 28W, so none of them beat the reference. The reference by the way is something the author chose not to test in its production form - I believe it was an MSI Stealth 15M which you can order now.There is nothing new here, just an ignorant tech writer unaware of variable TDPs. For years now laptops have shipped with varying ability to burst higher TDP than rated. We have 10750H 35-45W laptops running 65W, same thing with Ryzen 7 4800H which has been known to hit 90W on wall power.
Teckk - Sunday, October 11, 2020 - link
“ So this means that any game that uses more than 1 core will heavily favour Intel.”What does that even mean?
Spunjji - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
It's nonsense. Usual flailing you see from people desperate for their team to win.4rk4noid - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Did anyone noticed the strange pricing on the new CPUs?Going 8 cores, 33% over 6 cores is 50% more expensive, going 12 cores 50% over 8 is 22% more? WTH?
nandnandnand - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
Yeah, people noticed. Just divide the $ amount by the core count. $50 per core (6), $56.25 (8), $45.83 (12), $50 (16).The 8-core is unusually expensive, the 12-core is a "good deal". If you were forced to buy a Zen 3 CPU right now at launch price, you should pick the 6-core or go straight to the 12-core. 16-core only if you need that. But AMD could release a 5700X and other models later.
qwertymac93 - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
Evidently AMD is having a tough time getting full 8-core dies. The six and twelve core CPUs both use harvested 6-core dies. Maybe yields aren't great or AMD is hoarding the full dies for server products.alexbhatti - Monday, October 12, 2020 - link
hellocroc - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
Before anyone goes touting how wonderful these new processors are, please go look at their underlying chipset's PCI/e specs... (1 x16 or 2 x8s, i x4 for m.2 NVME slot - all the rest of the usable lanes (16) go to SATA and USB, and are controlled via an x4 interlink.)The chipset choking is cutting off my air supply....
qwertymac93 - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
24 PCI-E 4.0(AM4) VS 16 PCI-E 3.0 (LGA 1200).Yeah, these AMD chips are really choking.
qwertymac93 - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
*I meant 20 for AM4.*Curse this archaic comment system's lack of editing capabilities.
Qasar - Tuesday, October 13, 2020 - link
how are they chocking ? if anything intel is choking cause of the pcie 4 vs pcie 3 difference at the momentalexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
https://meta.ifixit.com/Answers/View/15632/Yahoo+h...https://www.theepochtimes.com/clear-evidence-of-co...
https://www.sportskeeda.com/esports/5-best-games-l...
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16148/amd-ryzen-500...
alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Like the TYR suit, the streamlined design of this Nike cutout style allows serious swimmers to focus on their stroke — not their knee length swimsuit. “It is not only comfortable but very durable,” says Julie Stupp, a 2012 Olympic trials finalist swimmer and in-house product reviewer for SwimOutlet. “The Nike Cut-Out also has thin straps that don’t dig into your shoulders and back. These suits will last through hours and hours of training.” Novaswimwear is the no #1 in the swimwear products. They are kept in mind their customer need and budget. A swimsuit can be worn as an undergarment in sports that require a wetsuit such as water skiing, scuba diving, surfing, and wakeboarding. There is a very wide range of styles of modern swimsuits available, which vary as to body coverage and materials. The choice of style depend on people to chose swimwear that are fit on them. At Nova Swimwear, we stock a great selection of affordable knee length swimsuit designs for women at prices that won't break the bank. Our range includes designs to suit even the most demanding swimmer, including many varied prints in solid and fluo colors. From sleek, sleek swimsuits to bold and colorful, each and every one of our products is made with chlorine resistant fabric for long-lasting quality and comfort.https://www.novaswimwear.com/ladies-swimwear/ladie...
alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Find a training swimwear to aid you in swimming training. Does it fit your body and feel lighter? So you don't need to look anywhere else. Try the one-piece spliced style because it's the best option, girls racing swimwear should be picked very carefully it has features like elastic cross and elastic edging. Give the detail across the bust. Show off your waist for a fantastic look. Electric mesh in the front and back helps provide support for tummy control. It will give you a vain step by the pool, which is beautiful and courageous. Different sizes are available. These best fits cup sizes A to D. They are available in a variety of prints. Sometimes it comes with a ruffle design at the neckline. It should be the one that's on. Buy sports swimwear for women. Thousands of chlorine resistant swimsuits for your fitness sessions or swimming training. Our range of women's training and competition swimsuits are built to last. At Nova Swimwear, we have a huge selection of affordable girls racing swimwear designs at prices that won't break you a fortune. Our range includes models to satisfy even the most demanding swimmer, including many varied prints in solid and fluorescent colors. From sleek, sleek swimsuits to bold and colorful, each and every one of our products is made with chlorine resistant fabric for long-lasting quality and comfort.https://www.novaswimwear.com/women/ladies-racing-s...
alexbhatti - Wednesday, October 14, 2020 - link
Novaswimwear is a swimwear brand. We make quality to enhance the look of your body. Each piece is personalized and sculpted with lots of support for the bust. Ensures good looking fabrications and contour power mesh. It is designed to shape your body. It is designed to look flatter. The full range of Nova swimwear sale that has been standard in the "true to size" summer sales for curvy women and fashion models. We have sizes from 14 to 24. You may estimate that you will need a size small or a normal size. The Novaswimwear brand will look trendy and adorable on your curvy body. Discover the sale of women's swimwear and beachwear at Novaswimwear. Shop the latest collection of women's swimwear and beachwear on sale. Find great deals on swimwear in our exclusive women's sale range. Shop for everything from swimsuits, bikinis, and tankinis to beach cover-ups. Every franchise loves the sports illustrated swimsuit edition. Swimsuit has always been a highly anticipated edition of the Sports Illustrated franchise. Sports swimwear sale is trendy nowadays especially in females. We have a large range of sporty swimsuits. Our collection includes One-piece and knee-length. It entirely fits the body with a sporty feel. Make a splash and get moving in our bold range of sports swimwear. Shop from a wide collection of swimwear for ladies at Novaswimwear. Choose from a wide range of bikini sets, board shorts and more by leading brands.https://www.novaswimwear.com/featured-categories/g...
bairlangga - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
One month passed? And still no review on the rtx3000? Man oh man, what has happened between anand and jensen?Qasar - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
nothing has happend. if you have been reading, it has been stated by AT that the vid card reviews have been delayed due to the on going wild fires in california, which is where the gpu reviewer, lives.AMDSuperFan - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
NVidia is a great company, not up to AMD standards, but amazing. If they choose to not send their cards, it is out of fear for Big Navi. Nvidia bought 3Dfx while AMD bought the much better ATI company. If you were making a card that was about to become yesterday's news when AMD comes to town with the Big Navi, would you want people reviewing it or would you hide under your sheets?peevee - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
No DDR5, no PCIe5, and price increases across the board. Very expensive motherboards.SO DISAPPOINTING.
They are giving Intel some breathing room.
Qasar - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
yea, ok. too bad zen 3 wasnt going to support ddr5 or pcie 5. so thats a false statement. very expensive boards ? yea ok. sureMickatroid - Thursday, October 15, 2020 - link
'Consummate' is not what I think you mean. 'Commensurate' perhaps? 'Matching' will do the job and no-one will get confused ;)six_tymes - Sunday, October 18, 2020 - link
raising the prices... amd the new Intel.Qasar - Monday, October 19, 2020 - link
yea ok sure. i dont understand why most are crying over amd raising their prices. if the performace is there over prev gen, and intel, ( which we will know for sure Nov 5th ) then it is justified. after all., didnt intel raise its prices over the years when intel had the performance advantage ??? come on. do people really expect amd to keep their prices below intel even if they have the lead across the board ????????????klausii - Tuesday, October 20, 2020 - link
Guys, all the tests like Cine and actual games, I guess, are based on average performance, right? Is there a good measure of whether a CPU gets bogged down at one point or another that doesn't get captured by the average (numbers crunched / time spent). When doing heavy loads, like those few seconds where a ton of trolls run around at the same time, that's where I want performance. I don't care much about performance in 95% of the time. Any tests you know about that can inform me here?JohnnyLose - Tuesday, October 20, 2020 - link
Anyone knows is there is any info on when Zen3 will come to laptops?six_tymes - Friday, October 30, 2020 - link
When is DDR5 platforms coming? I would much rather wait for it if its not far off.alpha754293 - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
What's the maximum amount of RAM that either the CPU or the X570 chipset will be able to support?nikitapanday - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link
A housewife as a call girl is a forbidden fruit which everyman on this earth would like to eat. There is something about the way housewives exude their sexiness that anybody could fall for them irrespective of age or genre. The housewife escort Mumbai comes from this breed and you could expect it to be a choice encounter that you will remember for life. Though it cannot be said the same about a College call girl in Mumbai, you can expect the meeting to be a novel experience besides being satisfactory as you have been provided with the opportunity by the escorts agency.http://nikitapanday.in
nextlevelpc - Saturday, October 30, 2021 - link
Can’t blame people for thinking that way really 🙂 Many people came into the PC market when Intel was at its best and AMD couldn’t touch that level of performance. It’ll take time for the stigma of ‘inferior’ to wash away.As for the laptop, I’d suggest waiting for a bit, if at all possible. Intel’s 10th Generation Mobile offerings look pretty neat from a graphics POV and also consume less power. Plus, AMD’s also going to launch the next-gen, Zen 2-based mobile CPUs soon.
I’ve never encountered lag on my laptop discrete GPU, so not too sure what’s happening there. Could be a driver issue. You could try going into the Nvidia control panel and manually setting ‘Photoshop’ and other Adobe apps to Max Performance.
If I did have to pick between those two for those tasks, I’d go with the R5 + 560X + 512. Also, I think you’re talking about the Acer Nitro (looks like it from the specs you mentioned) and it’s a great laptop for sure,
Next Level Pc
https://nextlevelpc.ma